Note: The online Request to Speak window has expired.
The online Comment window has expired
Agenda Item
15 22-3196 QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING:
Approving an Easement over the parcel of accreted land adjacent to the Key West Marriott Beachside Hotel; Pursuant to Section 2-938(b)(3) of the Land Development Regulation of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Key West, Florida; Providing fees and conditions.
Notwithstanding the debate over the desirability of public use, would it not make more sense for the City to receive fair value annual fees in exchange for the easement? $400 annually? Considering the amount of money the grantee and the grantor have spent attempting to resolve this dispute, why would the City not assess a more meaningful annual fee to recoup this cost and charge a fair amount to the for profit business. This business obviously places a great deal of importance on this easement. Ridiculous! One more example of favorable treatment to a certain small group of wealthy brokers who benefit from friends inside City Hall. This is an insult to the the City's taxpayers.
Spottswood puts up an illegal fence & steals public property from all of us and you, the city, reward him for it by giving it to him? The city mgr. lies about the property belonging to SH5, you all ignore over 1000 of us signed a petition asking the beach to be reopened and completely ignore the affidavits we signed, mine certifying that beach has been public access for almost 40yrs. all for Spottswood... It's no surprise that some of you are in his pocket and others beholden to him, but that you lie that Reece's survey shows the property is his, "there is no use" for the beach and that the City would lose in court, you just insult our intelligence. Stop your lies and Restore Dinghy Beach.
This resolution quoting Mr. Chee-a-tow's retracted statement and Reece's biased survey = public deception, deprives the City of valuable property & constitutes fraud. The property, by law, belongs to the public due to the City's botched 2018 Quit Claim Deed and the City's refusal to ask FDOT for a reverse Quit Claim Deed is a violation of the Oath of Office - requiring you to work in the best interests of the City, including securing waterfront property for the public whenever possible. FL Statutes 161.55 and 151.053 require public access to Dinghy Beach and the Affidavits confirming long public use as required by law are on record. Quit ignoring the facts & laws and RestoreDinghyBeach!!!
Notwithstanding the debate over the desirability of public use, would it not make more sense for the City to receive fair value annual fees in exchange for the easement? $400 annually? Considering the amount of money the grantee and the grantor have spent attempting to resolve this dispute, why would the City not assess a more meaningful annual fee to recoup this cost and charge a fair amount to the for profit business. This business obviously places a great deal of importance on this easement. Ridiculous! One more example of favorable treatment to a certain small group of wealthy brokers who benefit from friends inside City Hall. This is an insult to the the City's taxpayers.
Spottswood puts up an illegal fence & steals public property from all of us and you, the city, reward him for it by giving it to him? The city mgr. lies about the property belonging to SH5, you all ignore over 1000 of us signed a petition asking the beach to be reopened and completely ignore the affidavits we signed, mine certifying that beach has been public access for almost 40yrs. all for Spottswood... It's no surprise that some of you are in his pocket and others beholden to him, but that you lie that Reece's survey shows the property is his, "there is no use" for the beach and that the City would lose in court, you just insult our intelligence. Stop your lies and Restore Dinghy Beach.
This resolution quoting Mr. Chee-a-tow's retracted statement and Reece's biased survey = public deception, deprives the City of valuable property & constitutes fraud. The property, by law, belongs to the public due to the City's botched 2018 Quit Claim Deed and the City's refusal to ask FDOT for a reverse Quit Claim Deed is a violation of the Oath of Office - requiring you to work in the best interests of the City, including securing waterfront property for the public whenever possible. FL Statutes 161.55 and 151.053 require public access to Dinghy Beach and the Affidavits confirming long public use as required by law are on record. Quit ignoring the facts & laws and RestoreDinghyBeach!!!