Various citizen organizations denounced the Panama City News Herald (a
Freedom Communications company) for conducting a smear campaign against
two Bay County Commissioners because of their positions to delay the St.
Joe land changes--West Bay and Airport Detailed Specific Area Plans (DSAPs),
and refusal to participate in a meeting that allowed telecom voting by an
absent commissioner.
"The polling process used by the News Herald was totally flawed, and
appears to have been rigged to produce the outcome that was wanted," said
Diane Brown, Citizens for the Bay spokesperson. "First, they gave a
slanted lead-in, obviously meant to bias the outcome. Then, they allowed
multiple calls from the same phones to be automatically recorded in the
unmonitored voting. The newspaper continued the survey even after they
were alerted that multiple voting was taking place. As a result, the poll
outcome is meaningless. The only opinions it reflects are those with
speed-dial."
"Furthermore, this 'survey', and the related editorial on Sunday, were not
only designed to be used against these conscientious commissioners now,
but also to impact their future political careers. Newberry has said he
will run for County Appraiser in election 2004. The St. Joe Company
certainly doesn't want John Newberry appraising their property; they may
have to pay their fair share in taxes -- thus, the attack from their ally,
the News Herald.
We also have heard that many people's views on the proposed airport have
not been printed in the paper, and those letters that do appear are often
heavily edited. Airport "news" articles are heavily slanted in favor of
the airport. One reporter has gone so far as to speak from the audience at
Airport Authority meetings, supporting the new airport, while there
covering it, which is unethical journalism and attests to the total lack
of objectivity in reporting the news on the airport relocation. On the
other hand, the paper gets rid of reporters who embarrass St. Joe. A
reporter was fired a few months ago after a mistake in his article cast
St. Joe in an unfavorable light.
The News Herald has also failed to report a number of negative stories
regarding St. Joe or the airport. They chose not to report the recent news
that Bay County Commissioner John Newberry was offered a deal by St. Joe a
week before the DSAP hearing. The deal the St. Joe representative offered
was the company would be willing to delay the adoption of the DSAPs if
Newberry dropped his efforts to have the county hold a ballot referendum
on the airport issue. Commissioner Newberry refused the deal, and
disclosed to the media the attempt to influence his vote. This incident
was reported by the television media, but not the News Herald. This isn't
the first time tips given to the News Herald on questionable practices of
St. Joe, the Airport Board or their allies have not been covered. Several
stories, such as the diversion of donations from one fund to another by
airport proponents, have apparently been squashed by the News Herald.
"The News Herald was once a good public watchdog over government, but over
the last few years has abdicated that role to become a tool of those
pushing this airport down the throats of the people of Bay County. Most
newspapers support citizen participation in government, but not the News
Herald. It opposes a citizen referendum on the airport, saying among other
reasons, that older voters may make up a large part of those voting, and
they may vote against the airport. At this point, the paper should change
its name. 'The St. Joe Herald' might be appropriate," said Rolf Mossbacher,
of the Panhandle Citizen's Coalition.
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 one 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 passage
Thursday," said Sharon Maxwell, Chairperson of the Northwest Florida group
of the Sierra Club. "he 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."
The County Commission voted Tuesday to finally schedule the airport
referendum that an estimated 70% of the citizens of Bay County have said
they want. "We were glad to see Commissioner Girvin join with Ropa and
Newberry in this vote," said Brown. Unfortunately, however, the vote, now
scheduled for March, is being taken after the DSAPs have already been
passed by the Commission. This was the last action required by the county
to enable the airport, approved without hearing the voice of the people .
"We strongly advised the county to wait until after the referendum before
passing the DSAPs," said Brown. "The county will now have to use some
other means of impacting the airport decision, in order to implement the
people's wishes."
Joint Citizens for the Bay/Panhandle Citizens
Coalition/Northwest Fla. Sierra Club news release on the Bay County
airport controversy:
Diane Brown, Citizens for the Bay, 850-234-5071
Art Stewart, Panhandle Citizens Coalition, 850-832-9210
Sharon Maxwell, Sierra Club, 850-897-5228
---------------------------------------
This article is copyrighted material, the use of which has
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making
such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of
environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific,
and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use'
of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US
Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the
material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml . If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go
beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
