Thursday, May 25, 2006
Tell it !
From Jeff Hughes, Retreat Owner
Dear Retreat Board members and Owners:
I have read your letter dated May 22, 2006 and would like to take this opportunity to respond to various issues that were brought up in that letter. In my mind, there are two separate and distinct issues here. One involves a complaint that was filed last November by a group of Owners alleging that the vote that was taken on August 22, 2005 to install Geotubes should not have passed because it did not have the necessary 66 2/3% vote of the entire membership. The other issue has to do with the actual permitting process that was begun last October and still goes on to this day.
Regarding the complaint that was filed, as you know, depositions are being taken, a mediation session is planned for this July, and the case is to be heard by the judge this fall. The complaint has been discussed in previous correspondence and there is no need to dwell on it here. Both sides believe they are correct and a judge will ultimately decide who is right.
Regarding the permitting of the Geotubes, I think it only fair that everyone know the history of the permitting process. Your letter states some of the facts of the process but at the same time blames the County and State agencies for not granting The Retreat a permit to perform the Geotube installation work. Just so everyone understands, The Retreat has applied for three permits to do the Geotube work. The first application was during the emergency order period after Hurricane Dennis, the second application was for an armoring permit in January, 2006, and the third application was under a general permit in March, 2006.
The first application to install Geotubes during the emergency order period was granted on September 6, 2005 by Mr. Gerry Demers with Walton County but was only for Lots 2,3,10,11,12,14,15,20,21,22,23,24 and the Common Areas in front of the pool and walkovers. The Retreat chose not to install the Geotubes at that time because the permit did not include all lots.
The third application to install Geotubes in March 2006, was denied by Florida DEP on March 31, 2006 because the “sand bag structure is defined as an armoring structure by Rule 62B-33.002(5), F.A.C., and therefore, is not eligible for a general permit.”
The second application to install Geotubes was indeed for an “armoring permit”. That application was sent in to DEP the first week in January, 2006. Florida DEP responded to that request on February 2, 2006 advising that is was incomplete and asking for additional information including name and addresses of all Owners, copies of a signed and sealed survey plat, final construction plans, proof that the project had been advertised in the newspaper, and also an application fee in the amount of $29,300.
Instead of complying with Florida DEP’s request for more information, The Retreat’s attorney, George Mead, tried to go around the armoring permit by filing a general permit and after that was denied, attempted to proceed with no permits. That action led to a “stop work order” by Walton County and no doubt did very little to improve relations between The Retreat and the various agencies. If The Retreat ever expects to get a permit to install Geotubes, Mr. Mead, and the Board, should adhere to the permit process, supply the necessary information to all agencies, and work within the law rather that complain that the law is wrong and they are being treated unfairly.
Finally, the attorney for the Owners that filed the complaint never threatened to sue the County “if any of the requested relief was given”. Such non-truths only make the Board look more desperate in their attempt to circumvent the permitting process because they feel they are above the law.
Dear Retreat Board members and Owners:
I have read your letter dated May 22, 2006 and would like to take this opportunity to respond to various issues that were brought up in that letter. In my mind, there are two separate and distinct issues here. One involves a complaint that was filed last November by a group of Owners alleging that the vote that was taken on August 22, 2005 to install Geotubes should not have passed because it did not have the necessary 66 2/3% vote of the entire membership. The other issue has to do with the actual permitting process that was begun last October and still goes on to this day.
Regarding the complaint that was filed, as you know, depositions are being taken, a mediation session is planned for this July, and the case is to be heard by the judge this fall. The complaint has been discussed in previous correspondence and there is no need to dwell on it here. Both sides believe they are correct and a judge will ultimately decide who is right.
Regarding the permitting of the Geotubes, I think it only fair that everyone know the history of the permitting process. Your letter states some of the facts of the process but at the same time blames the County and State agencies for not granting The Retreat a permit to perform the Geotube installation work. Just so everyone understands, The Retreat has applied for three permits to do the Geotube work. The first application was during the emergency order period after Hurricane Dennis, the second application was for an armoring permit in January, 2006, and the third application was under a general permit in March, 2006.
The first application to install Geotubes during the emergency order period was granted on September 6, 2005 by Mr. Gerry Demers with Walton County but was only for Lots 2,3,10,11,12,14,15,20,21,22,23,24 and the Common Areas in front of the pool and walkovers. The Retreat chose not to install the Geotubes at that time because the permit did not include all lots.
The third application to install Geotubes in March 2006, was denied by Florida DEP on March 31, 2006 because the “sand bag structure is defined as an armoring structure by Rule 62B-33.002(5), F.A.C., and therefore, is not eligible for a general permit.”
The second application to install Geotubes was indeed for an “armoring permit”. That application was sent in to DEP the first week in January, 2006. Florida DEP responded to that request on February 2, 2006 advising that is was incomplete and asking for additional information including name and addresses of all Owners, copies of a signed and sealed survey plat, final construction plans, proof that the project had been advertised in the newspaper, and also an application fee in the amount of $29,300.
Instead of complying with Florida DEP’s request for more information, The Retreat’s attorney, George Mead, tried to go around the armoring permit by filing a general permit and after that was denied, attempted to proceed with no permits. That action led to a “stop work order” by Walton County and no doubt did very little to improve relations between The Retreat and the various agencies. If The Retreat ever expects to get a permit to install Geotubes, Mr. Mead, and the Board, should adhere to the permit process, supply the necessary information to all agencies, and work within the law rather that complain that the law is wrong and they are being treated unfairly.
Finally, the attorney for the Owners that filed the complaint never threatened to sue the County “if any of the requested relief was given”. Such non-truths only make the Board look more desperate in their attempt to circumvent the permitting process because they feel they are above the law.
