content top
THEY ARE NOT FOOLING ME!

THEY ARE NOT FOOLING ME!

Follow me closely on this one.  Tell me if this makes sense to you.

The Wakulla Wetlands Alliance wants you to vote to impose a wetlands ordinance on the citizens of Wakulla County.  

Their proposed ordinance states:

Sec. 32.003 (7) “It is intended that the implementation of this chapter will accomplish the following objectives:

c. Ensure that owners of property containing wetlands and other surface waters shall not be unconstitutionally deprived of substantially all beneficial use of their property by the application of these regulations.

That sounds great right?  They are acknowledging the Constitution and their statement appears to be concerned with protecting the rights of property owners.  Let’s take a closer look to see if they really mean this.

The proposed ordinance goes on to say…

 The Wakulla County Board of County Commissioners may grant a variance for the following:
(1) The development of residential and non-residential properties within Buffer Zone Two if a failure to allow such development will deprive the developer of substantially all economic and beneficial use of the property, and so long as such development is consistent with other provisions of the Wakulla County Code of Ordinances, the Land Development Code, and the comprehensive plan.

Stills sounds pretty good right?  Sounds like they really do not want to “deprive the developer of substantially all economic and beneficial use of the property”, right?

Take a closer look.  This variance only applies to Buffer Zone Two.  Buffer Zone Two is 35 feet to 75 feet outside the wetlands.  

What happens if the lot size requires the home to be built in Buffer Zone One?  Buffer Zone One is also outside the wetlands, 0 to 35 feet outside the wetlands.  The proposed ordinance will not allow a variance in Buffer Zone One.  

If a proposed home will only fit on a property if allowed to be built within Buffer Zone One, and the proposed ordinance has no provision to grant a variance within Buffer Zone One, can’t we conclude that the property owner will be “unconstitutionally deprived of substantially all beneficial use of their property”?

Remember the intent of the proposed ordinance?

Sec. 32.003 (7) “It is intended that the implementation of this chapter will accomplish the following objectives:

c. Ensure that owners of property containing wetlands and other surface waters shall not be unconstitutionally deprived of substantially all beneficial use of their property by the application of these regulations.

This is one of those cases where we must look beyond what they say to see the truth.  They are hoping that you will not see the truth, but you and I will not be fooled by their tactics.  

If the ordinance remains repealed, there will be no need for variances in either zone.  The ordinance claims to avoid “unconstitutionally depriving” people of the use of their land.  That claim is correct for those who intend to build in Buffer Zone Two.  For someone who needs to build in Buffer Zone One, the proposed ordinance will not permit a variance, therefore, even if we desire to avoid unconstitutionally depriving people of the use of their land, we will be forced to do so.  The proposed ordinance will tie our hands and could be used in court to make a case that we acknowledged in the ordinance that the very concept we desire to avoid is mandated by the ordinance (for buffer zone one).

This risk I described above has already been eliminated.  A yes vote will bring it back.  If it comes back, it can only be changed by a unanimous vote of all County Commissions or by referendum of Wakulla County Voters. 

A NO vote on Referendum A will eliminate this threat.

You now know the truth. Your friends and family deserve to know the truth also. Please share with everyone you know, by Facebook, email, and personal conversations. Also leave a comment below and share your thoughts.

Vote NO3

 

One Response to “THEY ARE NOT FOOLING ME!”

  1. Terri Jay says:

    We are Wakulla property owners and we will be voting NO! Thank you Ralph for the Truth!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *