PANHANDLE CITIZENS COALITION (PCC) DENOUNCES DSAP APPROVAL BY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AS PART OF AN APPARENT CONCERTED
EFFORT TO AID THE ST. JOE COMPANY DEVELOP THEIR PROPERTY MORE RAPIDLY
(forum
3/4/04) (fact sheet)
Panhandle Citizen's Coalition (PCC) early today harshly criticized
the Florida Department of Community Affairs' (DCA) approval Thursday
of the Bay County Detailed Specific Action Plans (DSAP's) for the
Airport and West Bay area. The formal notice of intended approval is
expected to be published on Tuesday,. March 2nd in a local newspaper
published in Bay County.
John Hedrick, Chair of PCC, stated "Just like the Bay County psudo-hearings
on the DSAP's, now DCA chooses also to run roughshod over the
citizenry by ignoring the many valid points previously raised, some of
which are shown below from news releases previously issued on
December 11 and
18, 2003.
"And, just like the approval two days previous of the St, Joe
Company's permit by DEP, this latest approval raises the issue once
again of the state fasttracking their projects to the detriment of the
public. One can only hope that in their hasty rush to approve these
DSAP's, they at least checked to see if necessary corrections
previously identified were made, such as to make sure the St. Joe
Company could be subject to future impact fees." said Hedrick.
Hedrick added, "We and other organizations intend to carefully review
both these approvals with an eye toward litigation as that apparently
is one of the only ways these governmental agencies will respond more
appropriately towards the public. And we, along with our other partner
organizations Citizens for the Bay, Sierra Club, Clean Water Network,
Friends of PFN and Gulf Coast Keepers, are vigorously working toward
producing a "NO" vote on the upcoming referendum in Bay County on
March 9th."
--------------------------------------------
FOR IMMEDIATE
RELEASE: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
DECEMBER 11,
2003
DIANE BROWN 850-234-5071
JOHN
HEDRICK 850-339-5462
SHARON
MAXWELL 850-897-5228
FRANK
GORHAM 850-747-0514
CITIZENS GROUPS DECRY SPEED OF DSAP
APPROVAL WITHOUT PUBLIC REFERENDUM AND OTHER PROPER CONSIDERATION OF
PUBLIC INPUT
Various citizens groups Thursday
night criticized Commissioners Girvin, Gainer, and Brock for their
unseemly haste in passing the Detailed Specific Area Plans (DSAP) on
the proposed airport and
West
Bay
without meaningful consideration of the public's input either at the
Commission meeting or a Referendum of the public ahead of the DSAP's
approval.
"These 3 commissioners were not
interested in considering public input tonight" said Diane
Brown, spokesperson for Citizen's For the Bay (CFB). "This vote
tonight was to facilitate the St. Joe Company's land development
projects, pure and simple. St. Joe’s land values vaulted tonight by
the vote of these Commissioners. They were given pages of significant
recommendations of changes to make the DSAP's compliant with law. Mike
Ropa was the only one that showed any interest whatsoever in doing
this right."
John Hedrick, Chair of the Panhandle
Citizens Coalition (PCC), was equally blunt. "Commissioners Gainer,
Brock and Girvin didn't care at all about public opinion tonight. They
didn't even vote to schedule a public referendum, which is what 70% of
the public wants, and what Girvin said he would do after the DSAP's
were adopted."
Sharon Maxwell, chair of the Northwest
Florida Group of the Sierra Club, said "We are disappointed that these
commissioners have moved these land changes forward before all the
environmental impacts of this project are fully known. The
Commissioners ignored Sector Plan backers 1000 Friends of Florida and
St. Andrew Bay Resource Management Association (RMA), who also
counseled delay so that much needed changes could be made to the
DSAP's."
Frank Gorham,
Chair of Friends of PFN said "It is sad that a perfectly good airport
is being trashed as a strawman to justify an unneeded facility. This
entire DSAP/Airport issue is about land values-not about jobs and
economic security."
Brown added, "This is a dark day for Bay
County when raw corporate economic power is allowed to run roughshod
over the overwhelming majority of Bay County's voters’ desires to have
a say-so on potentially the biggest project which will ever affect our
community. The citizens will still have their say--it ain't over
until it’s over."
Hedrick elaborated that legal and
administrative challenges will be intensified, notably on challenging
the adoption of the DSAP's. "The electoral process will also be in
full swing in all three county commission races plus others. The
public will want to know if the candidates will allow a referendum on
the airport and if they want to build a new airport. Another thing
folks will be looking for is candidates who will be able to stand up
to the St. Joe Company. This fight is far from over; in fact, the
people have just begun to fight."
------------------------------------------------------------
The below is
excerpted as a block from a previous PCC, Citizens for the Bay and
Sierra Club news release issued December 18, 2003:
Mossbacher said that the county’s
handling of the DSAP hearing ignored
the legal requirements of the Florida Growth Management Act. The
meeting was conducted in a manner that discouraged public
participation and
meaningful deliberation. Knowing a large crowd would attend, the
commission made no effort to move the meeting to a larger facility, as
it
has in the past for large attendance meetings. Many citizens stood
in
hallways and in the lobby, trying to hear the discussions, and waiting
to be called to speak. There was no video hookup provided; only
audio,
and that feed was poor. Many left in frustration before getting to
speak.
Many citizens raised important points about the lack of consistency
between the DSAPs and the comprehensive plan or Florida Statutes, and
suggested many other much-needed improvements to the DSAPS. The
commissioners did not discuss citizens’ objections or recommendations,
but
merely sat expressionless, as if they did not care to hear what was
being
said. Commissioner Gainer's statement, "We are here to listen, not
talk," indicated there would be no open discussion by the Commission,
and
indeed there was not, as very few if any specific objections were
answered by the Commission. Mike Ropa was the only commissioner who
even
asked any probing questions of staff. It was very clear they had
already
made up their minds, and did not want to hear any facts. This flies
in
the face of Gainer's recently published comments that there is
insufficient information to make a decision.
"There was absolutely no environmental organizational support for the
DSAP passage Thursday”, said Sharon Maxwell, Chairperson of the
Northwest Florida group of the Sierra Club. “The commissioners ignored
several
organizations that asked for improvements, further review, and
especially that all the preservation lands be included in the DSAPs.
Without
this inclusion to guarantee preservation, this was a very bad deal for
the environment. The land changes for the new airport were moved
forward without the FAA EIS environmental determination, or all the
promised
preservation lands.”
All together, this hearing is ripe for procedural challenges. “We
don’t think it was conducted in accordance with either the letter or
the
spirit of the law,” said Brown. “And these DSAP's are inconsistent
with
the County's Comprehensive Plan in a number of areas. We hope the
Department of Community Affairs will review them carefully, and send
them
back to the county for some major revisions.”
Mossbacher added, "It's clear this was all about aiding a St. Joe
Company land deal when you learn that the day after the hearing, their
stock
rose $1.71/share. This means the value of the vote to the company's
shareholders was worth a cumulative $130 million. St Joe CEO Peter
Rummell, with his 1 million shares, gained a tidy $1.71 million on
that day
alone.”
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
February 27, 2004
JOHN
HEDRICK 850-339-5462
--------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s Time For the Truth!
Thursday, March 4, 7:00 pm
Gulf Coast Community College,
Conference Center
Student Union Building, Second Floor
A panel discussion about the proposed
new airport.
Learn what hasn’t been reported in
the news:
*The funding *The need *Airline
service * Safety
*Environmental impacts *What it may
cost YOU.
Featured speakers:
 |
Mike Ropa, Bay County
Commissioner |
|
Jim Smallwood, Member, PC-BC Airport
Authority
|
|
Don Hodges, retired Delta airport
planner |
|
Linda Young, Regional Director, Clean
Water Network
|
Learn before you vote in the March 9 airport referendum.
You have been inundated with slanted and erroneous information by
airport advocates. This is your opportunity to learn all the facts,
and to express your views.
The future of Bay County is your
own future!
Presented by Citizens for the Bay, Inc., a nonprofit coalition of
concerned citizens and organizations. Want to help? Call 234-5071
------------------------------------
It’s
Time for Action! This is not a “done deal”
The Panama City-Bay County Airport
Authority has proposed to relocate the current airport to a site near
West Bay, just north of Hwy. 388. It is planning to build a much
larger airport that will cost more than $250 million. This proposal
comes with significant and far-reaching impacts upon our county, its
environment, land uses, infrastructure and our very way of life.
Economics:
|
A new airport does not
equal low fares. Low fares result from routes with huge passenger
demand. We are the end of a low-demand traffic spoke, and will
continue to be.
|
|
The present airport is
adequate to meet Bay County’s transportation needs. Passenger use
of the current airport is growing slowly, but overall flight
operations have actually declined. There is no proof that air
service will improve with a new airport. Nationally, airports with
runways shorter than ours, such as John Wayne airport in
California, have much better air service. Runway length at our
existing airport is not keeping out airlines.
|
|
A new airport does not
equal high-paying jobs. New job predictions provided by “experts”
paid by the St. Joe Co., are unbelievable, and have declined to
less than half of this company’s1999 estimate.
|
|
Who will pay? Much has been
made of the “free” airport. The estimated $250 million cost will
be paid with public dollars---federal, state, and a local match.
If the airport is not successful, more government funds will have
to be found to bail it out. You will pay. In fact, you
already have. $16 million in state funds have already been spent
on this project. Add to the price expected cost overruns, new
roads and other infrastructure, and conservation land purchases,
and the taxpayers’ tab for this project may easily increase to a
half billion dollars!
|
|
The current airport is
within a 15-minute drive for most citizens of Bay County. The
proposed airport will involve a 45 minute drive or longer for most
citizens. What is the cost of that time to all the passengers?
With this inconvenience, many of them will choose to use other
airports. |
Safety:
|
The Federal Aviation
Administration has stated that our airport is safe. It has an
excellent safety record. Its runways can accommodate the aircraft
we can expect to attract. About 40% of the airports in the U.S. do
not meet the newer FAA runway safety area design standards. They
are not building new airports.
|
|
FAA is considering 21
alternatives to this proposed airport. The majority of them are
onsite changes that address the runway, including the use of
overrun prevention materials. Any possible runway issue can be
resolved without building a new airport, taking a runway into the
bay or into neighborhoods. Also, the trend in newer
aircraft is to require less runway.
|
Environment:
|
The health of our bay is
the key to our economic health and quality of life. The proposed
4000 acre airport site will require the filling of 2000 acres of
wetlands critical to the health of St. Andrew Bay. Many thousands
of additional wetland acres will be filled in due to associated
developments. Mitigation (compensation for damage) does not
“replace” wetlands, it merely enhances or preserves those that are
left.
|
|
The proposed airport site
is among the most sensitive
by virtue of its proximity to the headwaters of Crooked Creek and
Burnt Mill Creek, and West Bay.
This airport and its related
developments would destroy wildlife habitat and disrupt the
natural flow of water into the bay. We can expect the health of
the bay to deteriorate, and its valuable resources to decline.
|
|
The Myth of the
Preservation Land: Other than the airport site itself, the St. Joe
Company is not giving away one acre of land for conservation. It
will use some of its lands for mitigation required due to its
projects, then will sell the rest. If the state or conservation
organizations do not buy it, the land will be sold to the highest
bidder—and developed.
|
Growth:
|
In December the county
passed land use changes for thousands of acres to enable the
proposed airport site---years before this land would be needed,
and before a public referendum could be held on this project. This
served only to enhance the value of St. Joe Co. lands, and to
limit the county’s ability to stop the airport project in the
future.
|
|
Massive development is not
the way to a prosperous future for Bay County. Quality places to
live were developed slowly and carefully. The only way to protect
West Bay is to stand by our growth plan and elect leaders who will
protect it from runaway, unhealthy growth. We should not rely
upon, or trust, the generosity of the St. Joe Co.
|
Democratic Process
|
This proposed airport is
being pushed by insiders and lobbyists. They have not considered
what you want or what you think. They label citizens who disagree
with this project as selfish “ginnits”, or backward NIMBYs, just
for caring about their community and its future.
|
|
Every attempt to hold a
ballot referendum, even a non-binding one, has been resisted by
all of the Panama City Commissioners and by three Bay County
Commissioners. Now you are being insulted by getting a county
ballot question that is slanted, misleading and fraudulent.
VOTE NO.
|
|
Bay County belongs to
YOU, and this decision should be yours. Every scientific poll
taken to date shows that a majority of likely voters are opposed
to the proposed airport. The erroneous media campaign funded by
the profiteers is an ineffective attempt to win your support,
while they strongly oppose your right to vote on this issue.
|
What You Can Do:
|
VOTE NO ON THE
AIRPORT REFERENDUM MARCH 9.
Don’t miss this important election. Request an absentee ballot if
you prefer. Supvervisor of Elections: 784-6100. Your vote is
important!
|
|
Write, call or email your
County and Panama City Commissioners. Let them know how you feel
about the proposed airport. Also write to your U.S. Senator and
Representative. FAA dollars should be used only where there is a
real need, not merely to enrich the few.
|
|
Attend every meeting
dealing with the proposed airport and voice your concerns.
|
|
Write letters to the
editor.
|
|
Get involved politically.
Support candidates who oppose the airport relocation.
|
|
Help with this effort. Help
us spread the word. Call 234-5071. |
The proposed airport is not a
“done deal!” You can make a difference.
Citizens
for the Bay ·
P.O. Box 19318 ·
Panama City Beach, Florida 32417 ·
Telephone: 234-5071
