Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Item Q1
Q.1 G BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS County of Monroe Mayor Sylvia Murphy,District 5 The Florida Keys l'U � � Mayor Pro Tern Danny Kolhage,District 1 �pw° Michelle Coldiron,District 2 Heather Carruthers,District 3 David Rice,District 4 County Commission Meeting June 19, 2019 Agenda Item Number: Q.1 Agenda Item Summary #5662 BULK ITEM: No DEPARTMENT: County Administrator TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Lindsey Ballard (305) 292-4443 10:00 A.M. AGENDA ITEM WORDING: A Sounding Board presentation by Jim James Sutcliffe, representing the Baitters Lane Canal Stewards Group, regarding a plan for a committed private/public partnership for improved water quality in Canal #266 between Bailey's Lane and Witters Lane, Big Pine Key. ITEM BACKGROUND: PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: n/a STAFF RECOMMENDATION: N/A DOCUMENTATION: FINANCIAL IMPACT: Effective Date: Expiration Date: Total Dollar Value of Contract: Total Cost to County: Current Year Portion: Budgeted: Source of Funds: CPI: Indirect Costs: Estimated Ongoing Costs Not Included in above dollar amounts: Packet Pg. 1697 Q.1 Revenue Producing: If yes, amount: Grant: County Match: Insurance Required: Additional Details: REVIEWED BY: Bob Shillinger Completed 06/04/2019 3:25 PM Kathy Peters Completed 06/04/2019 4:17 PM Board of County Commissioners Pending 06/19/2019 9:00 AM Packet Pg. 1698 June 17, 2019 History • 2014 —Assessment agreed to by homeowners prior to the county spending $1.5m on the Water Quality Improvement Project • Irma hit Big Pine in September 2017 and destroyed the air curtain • July 2018— County request homeowners to sign letters recommitting to assessment • August/September of 2018 obtained 20 signatures from homeowners supporting the air curtain and sent them to the county. One homeowner was opposed • November 2018 — Clarified criteria that changed from when letters were originally signed and offered option to homeowners to withdraw support. One homeowner dropped out. Vote reflects 19 in support, 2 opposed and 4 who did not vote a. This disputes a statement from Mr. Sutcliffe in a 5/20/19 email that states "no response to the question "How do the signers rescind their request for the levy"" • Count as June 17, 2019 remains 19 in support, 2 opposed and 4 no votes Emails, Claims & Statements 1. Deceptive behavior by Mr. Sutcliffe in his representation to homeowners a. A 5/23/19 email from Mr. Sutcliffe states "Those are also the same reasons why we now cease and desist from our efforts on our behalf in this issue of the special taxing district; which you apparently choose to request" b. A 6/1/19 email from Mr. Sutcliffe states "we agree to cooperate with the majority of our private neighbors in whatever they may decide" c. A 6/5/19 email from Mr. Sutcliffe states "I will go along with the plan to pay O&M for five years" d. Mr. Sutcliffe has outwardly led homeowners to believe that he has stopped his efforts to undermine the air curtain proposal, while clandestinely working behind the scenes to accomplish that goal. 2. The name being used "Baitters Lane Canal Stewards Group" a. The name is being used to imply Mr. Sutcliffe is speaking for a large group, which he is not QI b. The same deceptive language is identified by the constant us of the vernacular "we" and "my neighbors" to imply significant agreement with Mr. Sutcliffe's personal opinions and comments. c. The name has no legal bearing d. The name is not being used per any documented mandate of canal owners 3. Misrepresentation of votes a. There are 19 signed letters on file supporting the air curtain and assessment. There are 2 letters on file opposing the air curtain. These are the results of the original vote from August/September 2018 and confirmed in November 2018 b. On 6/3/19 a second vote was completed and submitted to the county. The purpose of this vote was to select the method of the assessment. There was an option to assess by lot or by parcel and an option for a 20 year or 5 year assessment period. This was not a new vote on if the air curtain was wanted. To the best of my knowledge, none of the 19 supporters has changed their mind as of 6/17/19. c. In three separate emails from 6/5/19, Mr. Sutcliffe claims the following: i. "On Sunday June 2nd, 2019 we concluded a vote as to our willingness to request a STD of our own. The vote was transparent and public, and it reflected the wishes of our neighbors to not request a STD" ii. "Seven votes for a Special Tax District (STD) is not a majority out of 25 parcels subject to the tax" iii. The county claims to have taxpayer support but this vote does not indicate that. Larry, what happened to the majority rules? The majority is not voting for this STD" d. All these statements are incorrect and are an attempt to distort the 6/3/19 vote on assessment options. The fact remains that 19 of the 21 homeowners who voted support the county installed and assessed air curtain. This support, and the documented results of both homeowner votes, are on file with the county. i. This conclusion is supported by Mr. Sutcliffe's own words. In his 5/23/19 email to the homeowners where he proports to stop opposing the air curtain, two of his stated reasons are: 1. "No one has responded in accord to our position. Not publicly, not privately, not personally." 2. "The county informs us that no one has stepped forward to change their signature on the special taxing district request that you have made in a 90% majority nor have they indicated support for another proposal apart from the county's proposed "air curtain" 4. Anticipated proposals and their unstated issues a. To install a different system i. A 6/1/18 email from Mr. Sutcliffe states that "we could file for and install an impeller system starting on Monday June 3, 2019" ii. FACTS 1. Engineering, design, drawings, environmental review, permitting or bids to support a new system have not been obtained 2. Access to private property to install, anchor and maintain the system has not been obtained 3. Permission to place and meter electrical has not been obtained 4. A funding mechanism has not been identified (there is currently only $600 in a homeownerr fund) b. To install a different system i. A 6/5/18 email from Mr. Sutcliffe sent at 9:48am states that "we are prepared to fund and install this gate immediately" and "we see no reason that you should not transfer the permit to our name" ii. A 6/5/19 email from Mr. Sutcliffe sent at 10:33am states that "We have the desire to reinstall the exact same equipment under the existing permit" and "we are able to commence funding and installation immediately" iii. A 6/5/19 email from Mr. Sutcliffe sent at 12:33pm states that "we wish to install the exact same system as the one installed by the county in 2015" and "we have presented a funding mechanism that is both fair, equitable, transparent and sustainable" iv. FACTS 1. The existing permit is jointly issued to me and the county. I will not agree to transfer it to Mr. Sutcliffe 2. Access to private property to install, anchor and maintain the system has not been obtained 3. Permission to place and meter electrical has not been obtained 4. The existing system was destroyed. There is no money available to purchase and install a new system unless it is supplied by the county. 5. A funding mechanism has not been identified. No proposal has been presented to, or voted on, by the canal homeowners (there is currently only $600 in a homeowner fund) 5. The statement was made that the assessment amount was not provided a. Emails from Rhonda Haag and Larry LeJeune stating the assessment amount were sent to homeowners on 7/19/18, 8/16/18, 9/19/18 and 11/17/18 6. The following emails from Mr. Sutcliffe stating the canal homeowners were misled about post Irma muck removal a. Email sent on 5/8/19 - "they had understood that weed removal was part of the agreement" b. Email sent on 5/20/19 - "residents of Canal #266 were unduly influenced to sign their requests for a tax levy to cover O&M on their weed gate" c. Email sent on 5/22/19 - "Larry you may owe your neighbors and update on the latest developments in that the county did not receive the funds to clear the muck from our canal as you were leading them to expect when they signed your request for the tax levy" d. FACTS i. Approval letters were signed in August/September of 2018. The email, dated 8/15/18, requesting these signatures did not state anything about muck removal ii. The only reference in that email was regarding timing of the air curtain installation and stated it could be installed after the $50m federally funded canal clearing (debris removal) was complete iii. The first, and only, mention of muck removal was not made until January 2019, which was 4 months after approval letters were signed. In that email (dated 1/23/19) I recapped Rhonda's statements from the January BOCC meeting with the following comment. "Also, Rhonda & the County are in the process of trying to secure additional funds for canal muck removal" iv. If Mr. Sutcliffe can produce any documentation to support his baseless claims, I challenge him to do so. Otherwise I would request that he discontinue his efforts to question my honesty 7. Tidal flushing a. An email from Mr. Sutcliffe dated 5/8/19 states "I have seen tidal flushing cleaning our canal." This is a comment that has been repeated to give the impression that a barrier is not needed. b. FACTS i. If tidal flushing and the homemade barriers were ever effective the canal would not have scored so low during the water quality testing. The fact that the canal had one of the worst water quality readings of all Keys canals is a strong indicator that this statement is incorrect ii. Also, the fact sheet for canal #266, produced by Monroe County in 2014 and based on 2011 canal testing and observation, specifically states the following regarding canal 266: Due to the presence of significant seaweed entry into the canal and lack of tidal flushing, a thick layer of decaying seaweed has accumulated on the bottom of the canal. 8. Tidal Flow a. A 5/8/19 email from Mr. Sutcliffe states "I see the air curtain as preventing the tidal flow i. Based on conversations with Ms. Rhonda Haag and Mr. Greg Corning, I have confirmed that the air curtain will turn off during westerly winds and will not hinder tidal flow 9. Conflicting Statements in emails from Mr. Sutcliffe about the Air Curtain design a. 11/19/18 - "We question the process of selecting the system of "air curtain" that was designed for use in a lake setting without tides not oceanic with tidal flow" b. 6/1/19 — "We believe the science behind the weed gate choice is flawed (the air curtain is unproven in this environment, it has been operational in fresh water with no tides) and engineering "experts" resisted input from local observers on the ground who questioned the choice before it was even implemented" c. A 6/5/18 email from Mr. Sutcliffe sent at 9:48am states that "we are prepared to fund and install this gate immediately" and "we see no reason that you should not transfer the permit to our name" d. A 6/5/19 email from Mr. Sutcliffe sent at 10:33am states that "We have the desire to reinstall the exact same equipment under the existing permit" and "we are able to commence funding and installation immediately" e. A 6/5/19 email from Mr. Sutcliffe sent at 12:33pm states that "we wish to install the exact same system as the one installed by the county in 2015" and "we have presented a funding mechanism that is both fair, equitable, transparent and sustainable" f. Mr. Sutcliffe is stating that the air curtain system is flawed, but also requesting the county assist him in installing the same system 10.Answers to the next three items are in response to a 5/8/19 email from Mr. Sutcliffe. The answers are based on my conversation with Ms. Cynthia Hall on May 21, 2019. I am not quoting her; I am recapping the gist of what she told me during the conversation. The information can be confirmed by speaking with her. a. Mr. Sutcliffe states "The county will not lower the levy even if it exceeds the operating replacement costs" i. FACT: The assessment amount can be lowered by the County Commissioners at any time if there is an abundance of funds in the account and/or new technologies reduce the O&M cost. Certain fundamental changes (i.e. Where the air curtain is no longer the best cleaning method) could result in the adoption of a new assessment and the retirement of this one. b. An email states that "We have no say in what the county does with our money" i. FACT: The money is kept in a dedicated account. It can never be used for any other purpose. It is public record and anyone on the canal, or anyone at all, can view all transactions made into and out of the account. c. An email states, "The property tax increase we are requesting will never be removed and will lower our property values" i. FACT: Calling it a property tax is a mischaracterization, that's not what it is. Also, the assessment is set for 20 years. After that it will end, and a new assessment would have to be adopted. As to lowering the property values, my comments on that do not come from Ms. Hall, but are based on speaking with some local real estate agents, that unofficially have informed me that a clear canal will have a very real and positive effect on property values. ii. In a 5/31/19 email, Mr. Sutcliffe again contradicts himself by stating "Property values can only increase with clean water once again filling our canal" Final Thoughts I will take a brief second to offer my personal opinion. I believe Mr. Sutcliffe has one goal, which is to disrupt the process to the point that the county will "walk away" from the air curtain project and the canal owners who have worked to find a solution will be left with what we currently have, which is nothing. I do not believe Mr. Sutcliffe has any interest in having a clean canal. I believe .his only interest is in not paying the assessment. If he is successful, I believe he will simply "disappear", and the canal will remain in its current state. I also find the following actions offensive. • While purporting to work cooperatively with Ms. Haag, on 5/21/19 he sends an insulting email about her to Commissioner Carruthers (for the record, I would like to applaud Rhonda for providing answers to everyone who has approached her with canal questions) • While seeking support from the BOCC, he nonetheless, on 6/3/19, sends an email to Senator Flores, incorrectly accusing the county of taking no actions to repair the air curtain since hurricane Irma • He has sent numerous emails to homeowners questioning my integrity and honesty • On 5/16/19, in what I believe was an effort to intimidate me, he bound together 2 x 4's and, under cover of darkness, strung them across the canal in front of my property to block weeds and have them stack up in front of my home Thank you for your time, and I sincerely hope that you will vote to adopt the air curtain and assessment. One final comment is that if the assessment is passed, I would ask Rhonda to try again for funding for muck removal. Maybe if this is presented as a joint public/private canal cleaning effort, it might help convince FEMA to include the canal. Sincerely, Larry LeJeune 30990 Baileys Ln Big Pine Key, FL 33043 225-806-3111 MGmail Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Canal #266 (Baileys &Witters) 1 message Fits r Po s r '.QM& cc-AM..4Wd tCA( of To &ta r'j Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991 @gmail.com> Mon,Apr 23,2018 at 12:05 PM To:Haag-Rhonda<Haag-Rhonda@monroecounty-fl.gov> Cc:geolpatl@bellsouth.net,jsevor@mindspring.com,Shellie Sevor<ssevor@bellsouth.net>,mckinzey@aol.com,jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com, Pam LeJeune <plejeune@themorangroup.net> Rhonda, It looks like the hurricane debris cleanup has been completed on canal 266. So since that phase of canal cleanup has been completed,I would like to take the opportunity to inquire as to the status of the air curtain repair. I have spoken to several homeowners along the canal and,so far,everyone is in favor of repairing the air curtain under the terms of the original agreement. I have not spoken to every homeowner but,to date,no one has said they are opposed to repairing the air curtain and assuming the responsibility for operation and maintenance after the county has completed their obligation to operate and maintain the air curtain for 2 years. Please read my questions/comments below and reply where appropriate: 1. A quick recap of events so far are as follows: 1) I provide the county approval to use my property as a staging area for canal clean up and air curtain installation on June 2014. 2) Work begins on May 2015. 3) Air curtain is operational on May 2016. 4) Hurricane Irma destroys air curtain on September 2017. 5)From September 2017 to current the canal has been unprotected. 2.Everyone on the canal suffered through heartache and inconvenience to allow this project to happen(traffic and dirt on the road,noise,smell,loss of use of the canal and having to relocate boats,etc.). I personally delayed construction of my home to allow the canal to be cleaned. I believe because of these reasons the county has an obligation to return the air curtain to working order as originally promised. I do not believe a disaster event is a valid justification for reneging on an agreement with the homeowners on the canal. 3. The county paid the cost to operate the system from Mid May 2016 to Mid September 2017,a period of 16 months. I believe after the re-installation of air curtain the county has a legal responsibility to pay for operating expenses for another 8 months in order to fulfill the original obligation of 24 months of county financing before cost revert to homeowner financing. 4. Prior to the start of this project,there was a pump system in place that was paid for by the canal homeowners. This system was removed by the county in order to clean the canal and install the air curtain. If the county intends to not reinstall the air curtain, I believe that,at a minimum,they have a responsibility to reinstall the homeowner funded system that was already in place. 5. When we last talked you indicated that repair of the air curtain was in doubt. Can you please provide the latest information on this. 6. When/if repairs are made,can you tell me what the anticipated homeowner assessment will be,and what is the basis for this assessment. I believe that when the operation of the system is under homeowner control,the cost can be significantly reduced by on-site management of when the pumps are operational. 7. You mentioned a alternate method of scheduled canal skimming,which removes sea weed during skimming,but does nothing to stop more weed from immediately flowing back into the canal. I would like to know the assessment related to this method. It may be that it is not much different that the cost of operating the air curtain,which I believe is a much better option. 8. At the time of transfer of cost to homeowners,what will be the county's responsibility? There are several county owned properties on the canal,and it seems that these properties should be included when determining an assessment amount. I believe all of these points need to brought to the commission and addressed,and homeowner input should be considered before a final determination is made on if the air curtain will be repaired. Our goal as canal homeowners is to have our canal protected and not have it return to the deplorable state it was in a few years ago. We have now had an unprotected canal for 9 months,and it does not appear a solution is going to happen anywhere in the near future. Please respond to everyone on this email,along with any other canal homeowners you have contact information for. I am also personally requesting that I be notified of any meeting or other events that are related to that status of canal 266. OTHER HOMEOWNERS: Please share with anyone else on the canal you know and can contact. Also,please share your thought with Rhonda. I believe a majority of us want the air curtain and are willing to pay for it. I would hate to see the project derailed because of a small minority of dissenters. Thank You, Larry LeJeune 225-806-3111 lejeune1991@gmail.com MGmail Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Fwd: Air Curtain -Canal#266 - Doctor's Arm 1 message 't To tkovatLovIWAS ItSucVM .G SUYPot Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Wed,Aug 15,2018 at 2:26 PM To:shearinj@comcast,net,Alice&Roger Meyer<meyerfam28@yahoo.com>,D'Ann Stone<dstone@tampabay.rr.com>,Ev<alpaca100@aol.com>,George &Gabrielle Kessel<gk30911@gmail.com>,James Stone<jstol@tampabay.rr.com>,James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com>,Jeff Sevor <jsevor@mindspring.com>,Joelle Sackett<joellesnaturals@yahoo.com>,Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com>,michael reisner <miker0653@yahoo.com>,Pam LeJeune<pamlejeune@gmail.com>,Shannon McKinzey-Shirey<mckinzey@aol.com>,sharon ripley<ssb321 @msn.com>, Shellie Sevor<ssevor@bellsouth.net> Greetings Everyone, The emails below reflect my latest communications on the canal. As you can see, I sent an email to the County Commissioners and received a response from the Mayor(David Rice), The bottom line is that once the federally funded canal cleaning is complete,they will reinstall our air curtain as long as we show support for assuming the O&M cost through a property assessment. Remember,this is no different from the original plan,and if not for hurricane Irma,we would already be paying the assessment and have a clean canal. The only difference is that because the county is in such a financial hole due of the hurricane,Rhonda is reluctant to push for the air curtain unless she feels like we will support her. I personally feel like it's an easy choice,because no matter if you live here,rent your home,or are planning to sell, the condition of the canal effects our quality of life and property values(both rental and resale). The main benefit to the assessment approach is that the county maintains ownership of the air curtain and is responsible for all maintenance and repairs when they are needed. I know some canals(like the one next door)have privately funded weed systems. However,these canals generally have much larger populations on them and have someone who lives there that is willing to maintain the system and collect money from everyone. We do not have anyone on this canal willing to do this and we have a small number of owners(25)so funding will always be an issue. If you want to keep our canal clean,I have attached a letter for you to sign and return to me. I will forward all letters I collect to Rhonda to present to the Commissioners. Please take time to read,sign and return the letter so we can keep our canal clean. I put conditions in the letter to help protect us and minimize the assessment amount. I will also personally meet with Rhonda to get a full understanding of the cost basis for the assessment. If anyone is interested in helping me gather signatures,please let me know. I do not have the emails for everyone on the canal(a complete list of owners and addresses is attached),so many owners don't even know what's going on. Any help will be appreciated. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thanks, Larry LeJeune 30990 Baileys Ln 225-806-3111 On Tue,Jul 10,2018 at 7:15 AM,Rice-David<Rice-David@monroecounty-fl.gov>wrote: Larry, Looks like hope is on the way. Thanks Rhonda. David Sent from my iPad >On Jul 9,2018,at 7:56 PM,Haag-Rhonda<Haag-Rhonda@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov>wrote: >We have$50 million in grants and contracts on the July bocc agenda to clear the canals,including this one.Beyond that,Im not sure what to do with this particular air curtain. After we clear his canal we could readily replace their original weed gate system.But if they truly are willing to pay for the o&m of the air curtain,about$75/month/resident,then it would be helpful to see a letter stating such signed by a majority of the canal residents.That would show commitment by the residents to the commissioners. >One final note is that the FIU report on the demo projects didn't report favorably on the effectiveness of air curtains. I still like them,but probably won't be installing any on new projects anymore. This was a good project though so I understand why the residents want the air curtain.We at least owe the residents their original weed gate system back... >-Rhonda >Sent from my iPhone >>On Jul 9,2018,at 6:30 PM,Rice-David<Rice-David@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov>wrote: >>Rhonda, »When do you estimate that we will be able to resolve this problem? >>DAVID >>Sent from my iPhone >>>On Jul 9,2018,at 3:46 PM,Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com>wrote: »> »>Mr.Neugent and County Commissioners, MG mail Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Fwd: Air Curtain - Canal #266 - Doctor's Arm 1 message Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 10:41 AM To: Haag-Rhonda<Haag-Rhonda@monroecounty-fl.gov> Rhonda, 1. See the last email I sent to canal owners, again documenting the anticipated monthly assessment cost. 2. See the updated assessment agreement letters. I now have 20 of 25 property owners and 20 of 23 homeowners signed up. 3. Let me know when you decide if you will add the air curtain as an agenda item. I hope you can because Marathon is the closest place for me to attend. Thanks, Larry 225-806-3111 -------- Forwarded message------- From: Larry LeJeune <lejeune1991 @gmail.com> Date:Wed, Sep 19,2018 at 10:35 AM Subject: Fwd:Air Curtain -Canal#266-Doctor's Arm To:Al Alesi <alalesi@bellsouth.net>,Alfred &Marie Sciabarassi<sciabarassia@bellsouth.net>,Alice& Roger Meyer <meyerfam28@yahoo.com>,Amy Brown <hotflosser@gmail.com>, D'Ann Stone<dstone@tampabay.rr.com>, Evelyn &Tino Dimarco<alpaca100@aol.com>, Gabrielle Kessel<gk30911 @gmail.com>, George& Pat Ruggiano<geol patl @bellsouth.net>, George Kessel<gap6126@gmail.com>,James Stone<jstol@tampabay.rr.com>, James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com>, Jeff Sevor<jsevor@mindspring.com>, Jerry Shearin <shearinj@comcast.net>, Joelle Sackett<joellesnaturals@yahoo.com>, Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com>, Laura Andre<lorealpalmbeach@gmail.com>, michael reisner <miker0653@yahoo.com>, Mike&Sue Lang <bigpine33@aol.com>, Pam LeJeune<pamlejeune@gmail.com>, Rick Casey <rickcaseyjr@gmail.com>, Shannon McKinzey-Shirey<mckinzey@aol.com>, Sharon Clark<vanclarkel@hotmail.com>, Sharon Ripley<ssb321@msn.com>, Shellie Sevor<ssevor@bellsouth.net>,Ted Dominick<Seascaperesort@comcast.net> Everyone, A quick update. I talked to Rhonda on the phone last week and although it was a brief conversation, she did not appear to have any problem with the items we listed on the approval letters we signed. She said she would be happy to go over the assessment cost with us in detail at the appropriate time. She did generally say that the basis for the assessment amount was ongoing O&M and a projected run life on the pumps of 10 years. Based on these factors,she still believes the monthly assessment amount will be around$65-$75. However, we will get more detail before the system is repaired. The next thing that has to happen is the County Commissioners have to approve the repairs. Rhonda is considering putting this as an agenda item on the October 17 meeting and if she does, I will speak as part of this agenda item. If it not added, I will speak at the meeting as a"stand alone"sounding board item. Basically, my understanding is that nothing new is going to happen until after 10/17 and I'll update everyone after that. If anyone finds out anything new or different than this, please update us. Thanks, Larry --------- Forwarded message--------- From: Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991 @gmail.com> Date: Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 12:54 PM Subject: Fwd:Air Curtain-Canal#266- Doctor's Arm To:Al Alesi <alalesi@bellsouth.net>,Alfred & Marie Sciabarassi <sciabarassia@bellsouth.net>,Alice& Roger Meyer <meyerfam28@yahoo.com>,Amy Brown <hotflosser@gmail.com>, D'Ann Stone<dstone@tampabay.rr.com>, Evelyn &Tino Dimarco<alpaca100@aol.com>, Gabrielle Kessel<gk30911 @gmail.com>, George&Pat Ruggiano<geol patl @bellsouth.net>, George Kessel<gap6126@gmail.com>,James Stone<jstol@tampabay.rr.com>, James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com>, Jeff Sevor<jsevor@mindspring.com>, Jerry Shearin <shearinj@comcast.net>, Joelle Sackett<joellesnaturals@yahoo.com>, Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991 @gmail.com>, Laura Andre<lorealpalmbeach@gmail.com>, michael reisner <miker0653@yahoo.com>, Pam LeJeune<pamlejeune@gmail.com>, Rick Casey<rickcaseyjr@gmail.com>, Shannon McKinzey-Shirey<mckinzey@aol.com>, Sharon Clark<vanclarkel@hotmail.com>, Sharon Ripley<ssb321@msn.com>, Shellie Sevor<ssevor@bellsouth.net>, Ted Dominick<Seascaperesort@comcast.net> MGmail Larry LeJeune<Iejeune1991@gmail.com> Re: Canal Update 1 message Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Sat,Nov 17,2018 at 10:56 AM To:Al Alesi<alalesi@bellsouth.net>,Alfred&Marie Sciabarassi<sciabarassia@bellsouth.net>,Alice&Roger Meyer<meyerfam28@yahoo.com>,Amy Brown<hotflosser@gmail.com>, D'Ann Stone<dstone@tampabay.rr.com>,Evelyn&Tino Dimarco<alpaca100@aoi.com>,Gabrielle Kessel <gk30911@gmail.com>,George&Pat Ruggiano<geo1pat1@bellsouth.net>,George Kessel<gap6126@gmail.com>,James Stone <jstol @tampabay.rr.com>,Jeff Sevor<jsevor@mindspring.com>,Jerry Shearin<shearinj@comcast.net>, Loreal Rushin<lorealpalmbeach@gmail.com>, michael reisner<miker0653@yahoo.com>,Mike&Sue Lang<bigpine33@aol.com>,Pam LeJeune<pamlejeune@gmail.com>, Rick Casey <rickcaseyjr@gmail.com>,Shannon McKinzey-Shirey<mckinzey@aol.com>,Sharon Clark<vanclarkel@hotmail.com>,Sharon Ripley<ssb321@msn.com>, Shellie Sevor<ssevor@bellsouth.net>,Ted Dominick<Seascaperesort@comcast.net> A couple of additional points. • Based on previous estimates,the assessment is still expected to be between$65-$75 per parcel. However,a final amount is yet to be determined. • The county owned lots will not be included when determining the assessment amount. On Sat,Nov 17,2018 at 10:44 AM Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com>wrote: This is the latest on the canal air curtain. The information is separated into three specific parts. Feedback on the letter we signed,recap of information from Rhonda and Information about the BOCC meeting. This is based on my best understanding of our conversation,so apologizes to Rhonda if I state anything incorrectly. Letter Feedback: The county has reviewed the conditions in the letter we signed and has amended as follows: • Where we stated there would be one assessment per property owner,the county has stated that the assessments must be based on Parcel ID#. So there will be one assessment per Parcel ID. This affects homeowners in the following way. o The assessment is per parcel,not per lot. Some of you own two lots,but have previously had them combined into one parcel ID. In this instance,you pay one assessment. o Some of you own two lots that each have its own parcel ID. In this case,you will be assessed for each parcel ID,so you would pay two assessments. If want to withdraw your signature because of this,please let me know and I will do so before the meeting. • Where we state the canal owners will have operational control,the county agrees if this means only that we have the ability to manually turn the air curtain on or off at times we desire. All other controls and ownership will remain with the county. • We stated that the assessment amount will be reviewed yearly. This will not happen. Once the assessment amount is established,it will remain in place for an extended period of time and will not be raised or lowered on a yearly basis. All other conditions of our signed letter are accepted without change. Rhonda Information: • Because of county outlay of funds due to Irma,Rhonda believes at best there is a 50/50 chance that the BOCC will approve the repair. Other options include: They do nothing,they put back something similar to what we had(some type of floating PVC gate,or we get put on a canal skimming schedule where the canal is skimmed on some yet to be determined schedule(every week,every 2 weeks,etc.). • She stated that even if the Board approves the repair,there is still a multi approval process to approve and implement the assessment. It would start at the BOCC meeting in December and would likely be a year before the assessments were implemented. In the interim,Rhonda would begin the process of getting bids to repair the air curtain. • If they vote to replace the PVC gate,the county involvement would end and we would have to assume ownership and maintenance of the gate. • She stated that the air curtains installed on other canals would not be replaced because there is no property owner support. Meeting Information: • The BOCC meeting is next Tuesday, 11/20. Our agenda item will be at either 10:00 or 11:00 am. As of today the agenda schedule had not been posted by the county. • Rhonda will present the item to the BOCC. She will outline the options that I stated above,but will not endorse any particular option. • I will speak after Rhonda and will present the case that we have owner support and that the BOCC should approve the air curtain repairs. • If anyone else wants to speak,you need to arrive before the agenda item begins and fill out a Blue Speaker Card. You will be allotted 3 minutes to speak. Thanks,Larry Subject: Re: canal #266- witters lane, Doctor's Arm, BPK 7 Coldiron-Michelle©monroecounty-fl.gov Tue,Nov 20,2018,7:06 AM to James Sutcliffe You are viewing an attached message. Gmail can't verify the authenticity of attached messages. Good morning I have received and read your email. There will be a presentation today at the County Commissioner Meeting on this matter.We have also received many requests to keep a curtain. I will keep your opinion in mind. Michelle Michelle Coldiron On Nov 19,2018,at 8:22 AM,James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com>wrote: Monday morning, Good morning everyone.This is Joelle Sackett and James Sutcliffe.We are the owners of 30920 Baileys Lane,located on canal#266 on BPK.WE ARE FIRMLY OPPOSED to the air curtain being replaced.We question the process of selecting the system of"air curtain"that was designed for use in a lake setting without tides not oceanic with tidal flow.Our concerns relative to this unproven application were never addressed in regard to the limiting affect on tidal flushing. Tidal flushing is provided by nature at no cost to us and is our one currently effective means of maintaining water quality. We request the replacement of the priorly existing system of PVC pipe and surface propellers on each side. Respectfully, James Sutcliffe and Joelle Sackett On Sun,Nov 18,2018 at 9:51 PM ALFRED SCIABARASSI<sciabarassia@bellsouth.net>wrote: Good Evening, We are the owners of 30943 Witters Lane and the adjoining lot, both located on canal # 266 on BPK. We would like to express to you that we are OPPOSED to the air curtain being replaced and request that the BOCC move to replace the original PVC gate and or the surface propeller system that was in place prior to the the canal restoration and air curtain that failed miserably. Respectfully, Alfred and Marie Sciabarassi MGmail Larry LeJeune<Iejeune1991@gmail.com> Canal Update 1 message Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 4:58 PM To:Al Alesi<alalesi@bellsouth.net>,Alice& Roger Meyer<meyerfam28@yahoo.com>,Amy Brown <hotflosser@gmail.com>, D'Ann Stone<dstone@tampabay.rr.com>, Evelyn&Tino Dimarco<alpaca100@aol.com>, Gabrielle Kessel <gk30911@gmail.com>, George&Pat Ruggiano<geo1 pat1 @bellsouth.net>, George Kessel <gap6126@gmail.com>,James Stone <jstol @tampabay.rr.com>, Jeff Sevor<jsevor@mindspring.com>, Jerry Shearin <shearinj@comcast.net>, Larry LeJeune <lejeune1991@gmail.com>, Laura Andre<lorealpalmbeach@gmail.com>, michael reisner<miker0653@yahoo.com>, Mike&Sue Lang <bigpine33@aol.com>, Pam LeJeune<pamlejeune@gmail.com>, Rick Casey<rickcaseyjr@gmail.com>, Shannon McKinzey- Shirey<mckinzey@aol.com>, Sharon Clark<vanclarkel@hotmail.com>, Sharon Ripley<ssb321@msn.com>, Shellie Sevor <ssevor@bellsouth.net>,Ted Dominick<Seascaperesort@comcast.net> All, Just came from the BOCC meeting and the Commissioners voted unanimously,without debate, to pass the"notice of intent of assessment" resolution. Four people spoke in favor(thanks Shellie, Mike and Sharon)and no one spoke against. The next vote will be around April and will be the"adoption of the initial assessment"resolution. The final vote will be in June or July and is the"final assessment"resolution. Prior to either the initial or final assessment(I don't recall which)we will receive a letter from the County providing the design details of the new installation and the exact amount of the assessment. If there are no major changes, it looks like the Commissioners will continue to vote"yes"and we will get the canal fixed. Also, Rhonda&the County are in the process of trying to secure additional federal funds for canal muck removal (this is different from the federal funding for canal debris removal). If these funds are secured and we have the new air curtain installed, we will be on the list to have the muck removed that has accumulated over the last 16 months. Thanks, Larry Subject: Fwd: Canal 266 James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Wed,May 8, 12:51 PM ' to Atkins-Katherine You are viewing an attached message.Gmail can't verify the authenticity of attached messages. Hi Katherine,thanks so much for getting back and the follow-up! Could you help us in a technical matter related to county procedures? some of my neighbors are asking how they can remove their permission which they've given to the county, they're asking for what kind of letter they need to send to the county to rescind their agreement to pay for the replacement and maintenance of the air curtain... they had understood that the weed removal was part of the agreement as that turns out not to be the case they're less interested in the proposal. I will send along a thread of emalls among my neighbors that can track the development of our struggle to get our canal cleared of the muck accumulated since Irma. On Tue,May 7,2019,3:39 PM Atkins-Katherine<Atkins-Katherine@monroecounty-fl.gov>wrote: Hi Jim, I was wondering if Rhonda's response to your inquiry was sufficient. Let me know. Katie Atkins,Executive Assistant Michelle Caldron,BOCC District 2 25 Ships Way Big Pine Key,FL 33043 (305)292-4512(Office) (716)397-4263(Cell Phone) Atkins-Katherine@monroecounty-fl.gov www.monroecounty-fl.gov ;:;Monroe County Seal Large Monroe County,Florida MGmail Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Re:Air Curtain-Canal#266-Doctors Arm 1 message James Sutcliffe<jms.sutdiffe@gmail.com> Wed,May 8,2019 at 1:47 PM To:James Sutcliffe<jms.sutclifferf gmail.com>,Jerry Shearin<shearinj@comcast.net>,Alice&Roger Meyer<meyerfam28@yahoo.com>,D'Ann Stone<dstone@tampabay.rr.com>,En<alpaca100@aol.com>, George&Gabrielle Kassel<gk30911@gmail.com>,James Stone<jstol@tampabay.rr.com>,Jeff Sevor<jsevor@mindspring.com>,Joelle Sackett<joellesnaturals@yahoo.com>,Larry LeJeune <lejeune1991@gmail.com>,michael reisner<miker0653@yahoo.com>,Pam LeJeune<pamlejeune@gmail.com>,Shannon McKinzey-Shirey<mckinzey@aol.com>,sharon ripley<ssb321@msn.com>,Shellie Sevor<ssevor@bellsouth.net> Hello Neighbors, Here is the good news. I have seen tidal flushing clearing our canal even as more weeds keep coming in. Once we get our original surface system back in place,which Rhonda early on agreed we were due, please be assured that nature will be on our side for the resolution of our water quality issue. I know some of you had concerns about our ability to handle the situation on our own. There is an online model for a community agreement that provides for enforceable collection of funds. Our neighbore on the next canal to the north have been successfully maintaining their canal for years.We can follow the same solution or come up with our own. Now that we are willing to pay for the maintenance we can solicit bids for installation and maintenance of the system of our choice and modify as we see fit. Some of you may believe that this was a done deal since November.This is not the case, Per Rhonda Haag in November we still have the right to refuse the levy. If this recent development makes you change your mind then simply email Ms. Haag that you wish your name to be removed from the list of those agreeing to the levy and ask how to officially rescind your permission, in case that is required. Once the majority does not agree to the levy then the levy will not be put in place. You will be receiving a letter of the final offer from the county, that will be your last chance to remove yourself from those approving of the levy. On Wed,May 8,2019 at 12:46 PM James Sutcliffe<1rns.sutcliffe@gmail.com>wrote. Hello neighbors, Larry asked me to update you all on the recent developments of our canal cleanup. I am including the prior thread so we can all follow the development of our current situation. Here is the latest from the county- May 6, 2019 Reply :o Haag-Rhonda,Coldiron-Michelle,me Good morning Rhonda, Can you provide us with an update on Canal 266? Thank you, Katie Haag-Rhonda Mon,May 6,11:46 AM(2 days ago) Reply to Atkins-Katherine,me,Coldiron-Michelle Hi,the County is in the midst of soliciting a vendor to reinstall the air curtain at the mouth of the canal. The canal was cleared of all marine debris from Hurricane Irma,but we did not get approval from the federal granting agency to clear it of any sediment or seagrass from Irma.So at this time there are no funds to do so.I'll keep looking for alternate sources of funds but at this time I don't have any.The air curtain will help tremendously with the situation though. Thank you, FYI for those of you who are not local at the moment please be advised that the water quality has continued to deteriorate due to the constant influx of seagrass. Most days you could not paddle through the accumulated mat - - • - Water Quality Improvement Project —,f w• Canal No. 266 between Witters and Baileys Lanes Big Pine Key I Overview of Project: Monroe County has committed $5 million dollars to implement a Canal Restoration Demonstration Program,which will test various canal water quality improvement technologies,including culvert installation,weed barriers,organic removal, pumping and backfilling. A screening process was undertaken by the Canal Restoration Advisory Subcommittee members,appointed by the Steering Committee of the FL Keys National Marine Sanctuary,to identify the best candidates for the demonstration projects for each technology. "Poor"water quality conditions have been noted in the canal between Witters and Baileys Lanes in Doctors Arm in Big Pine Key.Due to the presence of significant seaweed entry into the canal and lack of tidal flushing,a thick layer of decaying seaweed has accumulated on the bottom of the canal. As the seaweed decomposes, oxygen is consumed leaving the canal in an uninhabitable condition for sensitive benthic resources such as sea grasses.The Canal Management Master Plan,which addresses all of the County residential canals, recommended that a restoration technique for improving the water quality in this canal would be the removal of the decaying organic material from the canal bottom and installation of an upgraded weed barrier at the canal mouth to prevent future seaweed entry. Based upon the screening criteria for selecting the demonstration project for organic removal and weed barrier installation. Canal #266, was selected as a demonstration project, and was eligible for County funding. The community is being offered a canal water quality improvement,funded by the County,which has a project value of approximately $1,200,000. Project Description: The project consists of removal of decaying organic material (muck)from the • canal bottom using a hydraulic vacuum dredge located on a barge situated within the canal to remove the decaying seaweed and restore the canal bottom environment. Approximately four to five feet of material will be removed. I The utilization of a hydraulic vacuum dredge will result in the collection of I� a wet slurry from the canal bottom comprised of decaying organic matter _ and saltwater. The dredge acts like a high powered vacuum cleaner that can remove organic material very precisely down to the original hard limestone and does not require disturbing the shoreline. The vessel based vacuum 11-7 dredge excavates and pumps the material through a temporary transmission • . • - line to a dedicated dewatering area. In order to expedite the dewatering of -- . the dredged slurry,polymers will be added to the slurry prior to its temporary , storage in Geotube® dewatering containers, which are plastic liners that are proposed to be contained in metal roll-off containers. The dewatered Example of a vacuJm dredge sediments will be disposed off-site at a facility that meets applicable State disposal criteria. After the organic material is removed, a six inch layer of sand will be placed on the canal bottom to create a more conducive substrate for benthic plant growth. Prior to initiation of the vacuum dredging,a series of floating turbidity barriers --- will be installed at the canal mouth to ensure that no marine life enters the canal during the construction and no turbid water leaves the canal.The canal will remain closed to boat traffic during construction. After completion of the organic removal project,an upgraded air curtain will be Oir.4 - installed at the canal mouth.The air curtain will consist of air diffusers placed i� �__-- on the canal bottom connected to a blower located on the shore adjacent to --� the air curtain. Monroe County will fund maintenance of the air curtain for a "" period of two years after construction of the demonstration project. Example ofoeotubes°in roll off containers MGmail Larry LeJeune eIejeune1991@gmail.com> Re:Air Curtain-Canal#266-Doctor's Arm 1 message James Sutcliffe<jms.sutdiffe@gmail.com> Wed,May 8,2019 at 5: To:Sheltie Savor<ssevor@bellsouth.net> Cc:Jeff Savor<jsevor@mindspring.com>,Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com>.Jerry Shearin<sheannj@comcast.net>,Alice&Roger Meyer<meyerfam28@yahoo.coms,D'Ann Stone<dstone@tampabay.m.com>,George&Gabriel'. Kassel<gk30911@gmail.com>,James Stone<jsto1@tampabay.rr.com>,Jostle Sackett<joellesnaturals@yahoo.com>,michael reisner<miker0853@yahoo.com>,Pam LeJeune cpamlejeune@gmail.com>,Shannon McKinzey-Shirey mckinzey@aol.com>,sharon npley<ssb321@msn.com>,Al Alesi<atalesi@bellsouth.net>,Amy Brown<holflosser@gmail.com>,Evelyn&Tino Dimarco<alpacaioo@aol.com>,George&Pat Ruggiano<gaolpatl@bebsouth,net>,Georg( Kessel<gap6126@gmail.com>,Joe Milo<Mortgexp@comcasLnet>,Laura Andre dorealpalmbeach@gmail.com>,Lawrence Weinberg<I_welnberg@bellsouth.net>,Mike&Sue Lang<bigpine33@aol.com>,Rick Casey <nckcaseyjr@gmail.com>,Sharon Clark<vanclarkel@hotmail.com>,Ted Dominick<Seascaperesort@comcast.net> Hi Larry, You did ask everyone to let us all know if there was anything new.I did find out something new- There are no county funds for clearing the bottom wrack. Our canal will remain as it is even after we start paying for the air curtain. As I said to you on the phone'-I acknowledge your hard work and diligence and I respect you for being so good at what you do. We do have a difference of opinion, 1.I see the air curtain as preventing the tidal flow. 2.Tidal flow Is currently cleaning our canal for us-when the wind is westerly our canal is clear. 3.The county Is not providing any funds for canal weed wrack clearing. 4. We are providing funds to the county. 5.The county will not lower the levy even if it exceeds the operating and replacement costs. 6.We will have no say in what the county does with our money. 7.The property tax increase we are requesting will never be removed and will lower our property values. Thanks for allowing me to make this clarification and,again,you sure are good at what you do! Respectfully, the"infamous we" • MGmail Larry LeJeune<Iejeune1991@gmail.com> RE: Barricade on canal#266 1 message Rios,Gus<Gus.Rios@floridadep.gov> Fri,May 17,2019 at 8:15 AM To:Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Cc:"boccdisl@monroecounty-fl.gov"<boccdisl@monroecounty-fl.gov>,"boccdis2@monroecounty-fl.gov"<boccdis2@monroecounty-fl.gov>, "boccdis3@monroecounty-fl.gov"<boccdis3@monroecounty-fl.gov>,"boccdis4@monroecounty-fl.gov"<boccdis4@monroecounty-fl.gov>, "boccdis5@monroecounty-fl.gov"<boccdis5@monroecounty-fl.gov>,Haag-Rhonda<Haag-Rhonda@monroecounty-fl.gov>,"Plee,Tara" <Tara.Plee@floridadep.gov>,"Charnock,Nicole"<Nicole.Charnock@floridadep.gov>,"Roberts-Michael@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov"<Roberts- Michael@monroecounty-fl.gov>,McPherson-Cynthia<McPherson-Cynthia@monroecounty-fl.gov>,"David Dipre(david.dipre@MYFWC.com)" <david.dipre@myfwc.com>,"Golden,Jason"<Jason.Golden@floridadep.gov> Dear Mr.Lejeune, This is to acknowledge that I received your complaint.I will call you today to assist you. The construction of structures,including barriers, on surface waters and wetlands requires authorization from our Department.It may also require permits from the County and the US Army Corps of Engineers so I am also forwarding your complaint to County code enforcement and US Army Corps staff in case they are not aware of your complaint. Sincerely, Gustavo Rios Program Administrator Florida Department of Environmental Protection South District Marathon Office (305)289-7081 Gus.Rios@FloridaDEP.gov From:Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday,May 16,2019 6:30 PM To:Rios,Gus<Gus.Rios@FloridaDEP.gov> Cc:boccdis1@monroecounty-fl.gov;boccdis2@monroecounty-fl.gov;boccdis3@monroecounty-fl.gov;boccdis4@monroecounty-fl.gov; boccdis5@monroecounty-fl.gov;Haag-Rhonda<Haag-Rhonda@monroecounty-fl.gov> Subject:Re:Barricade on canal#266 Mr.Rios, Unfortunately,as I suspected,a new canal block has already been installed. It has been installed at 30944 Baileys Ln. This is an unoccupied home. I believe the barriers are being installed by James Sutcliffe who lives at 30920 Baileys Ln. I have not yet personally seen him,but he has been observed by others. I am at a loss as to how to proceed. He continues to try to stack up weeds in front of other homeowners homes while protecting his own. I did not move the new barrier,but when the weeds reach my home I intend to dismantle it. Any guidance would be appreciated. Thank You, Larry LeJeune 30990 Baileys Ln 225-806-3111 On Thu,May 16,2019 at 3:26 PM Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991 @gmail.com>wrote: Mr.Rios, I found this barricade constructed in front of my home this morning on canal#266. The one I spoke with you about a couple of weeks ago,that was located further down the canal,was removed,but this one was apparently installed at some point late last night. I have already removed it,but wanted to at least generate a formal complaint about the installation to create a history because I suspect this or something like will it will be installed on the canal again. I did not observe who did this,but I suspect who it was and am now concerned enough that I have filed an initial police report(CAD# MCSO19CAD065721)about the incident. My concern is that what I believe is harassing behavior may escalate. This part is certainly not your responsibility,and as I stated I have already contacted the proper authorities about it. Please let me know if there is any further action I need to take in regards to filing a complaint about the environmental aspect of the barricade and how to best address the next one that is installed. Sincerely, Larry LeJeune 30990 Baileys Ln 225-806-3111 i�.;Dep Customer Survey A -., .'''',, \-', ..,•;-:,, „. .• 1 '''',..."-'• #;•',)‘ i ‘•1' . ••: . , .' . 441 ' • IL '!i',.• •Ii, • , ., ...•.,,, 1 \v, ';`,--','••• IS • ' Ag: 1' •'. • i, . Att ..•• 4 -'''.•• • • •• t t „_..„ , , .... ii.i , • - . _ . .. .,..,:: it , , i 1.111111.00.1111111.el. ' .. ..11 ./..`..„4 •;8, i 11, 4 . 0 — • ' - '' ....._ .- .Ss A'.v, ...-:' j•\,' t ' • At '!'-'' % II°. •' :!.14,,'"... . , _„ • ...'r• 1 .' ' ,,,,t,•,,lirt). 8.i r,, •y •... : •: i , s ) ., 1. 4'1/4 . 411011 ,4 1' . . . ..„4 . w. • .p .-1,,, 1/.•,, ,, • t. . 4 ' ` „• . •. tArri,..ki . • , ....,,... ..........• - , . - .,., . tii' II 1 .ti , t•.• • 4.1.-,.. .', '' 4 V 44' .,: • 0 . 1' ,#4 \ li , - . • t• 4 , • . _,. .'..- '-,` .. ,•.,,. 4fr..g. -.•, . 1----- lif .- ,„. •, . , .!J i, , .:- '' • - " "*I''-'' '.3 ' • . . , .,•. . -- . . . 6 t , ,.',••',./., . 71, •'4 1 .. r .?. i • , : ii. 1 'r: 2 '.--;,a.t-17 II '• ' ,, t ,, , I, ,,,•.: •: f • .., ;el .54,40,4-411lir I 1..... e , ..,,, `„ 6.: - '''' . . 7i. . _ $ . ,.. , 4 t ; ,t ,. I ' ...-' Ili - k i f.,.. e . " • - . t c . • 4.; . , . • ., I; ... ., .- • 1 V 1, . . 11' ' \ 1' — I. •-...... . . , . . 7' .. ... ,,,,-.,-.. .... do ..„...........4, -,...,o4,_„...a.ot,,,j,..,,,,, ,'` i #474jfirtiog: d'botui.v.i, . . t,. 4 ! it I , t f , ,#'11. • -,,,' ...,..ii -,j, i•1:.!,.,vil. ..',,.. I( ''.,,,I 1 .-,.. ,,,,,Asipmed,".10,040,0, -740, ,,,,,„,_ft il :III, . • IN-' * , .7 Tit, 4olitirforrisvrow!:tf 4, ..? •Ak . , - • ::, • , ...00 iitid01144 • 1 : .,-- - , i ' 4 ' .410 wail. 441,1k , r• , - ae ,e';• . - ...4111111111.1 4"NO ' , '4I % ' .'.•-•4.11 la ki ri I I 0 I kil 4 A f f t 1' ,. le ...tifi'lliollP44.r 1 c ,„, , • /,'.' 4 44 dg 0.47.1 I ' . + ' A... .,, : i'41.1 • . ' _>*/,' vr. . ., •,..,,,..4 ,, ., .- ..-...- . •. .. , . . ,.„.:NI...,' i .,.., Subject: Re: Permission to speak to the commissioners at their meeting Wednesday? James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe©gmail.com> Mon, May 20,2:54 PM • to Atkins-Katherine, Schreck-Carol,James Sutcliffe You are viewing an attached message. Gmail can't verify the authenticity of attached messages. Hi Katie, This the nature of our concern: We wish to inform the commissioners as to the nature of the process by which residents of Canal #266 were unduly influenced to sign their requests for a tax levy to cover O&M on their weed gate. We wish to reveal legal irregularites in the document which they signed and indicate that there has been no response to the question "How do the signers rescind their request for the levy?" We further wish to request that the commission cooperate with the Canal Stewards in replacing the weed gate removed by the county in 2015. Sustainable water quality is everybody's business! We request our seat at the table on the basis of historical performance by citizen volunteers in pursuit of the best water quality ever. Let us make note here that the county has not yet offered any assistance to any citizen volunteer canal steward maintaining their individual canals with private weed gate systems. This flies in the face of the fact that WE ARE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN ACTIVELY PURSUING THE GOAL OF WATER QUALITY FOR THE PAST 30 YEARS WITH PRIVATE FUNDS! Please help us correct this gross injustice before it is allowed to occur! Thanks! Citizen Volunteers For Water Quality Improvement On Mon, May 20,2019 at 2:24 PM James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com>wrote: Hi Katie, Please let me know how to get some time on the agenda for the next commissioners meeting. I would like them to address our concerns about the handling of our canal issues. Thanks, James Subject: Re: Conference call today?!! Schreck-Carol@monroecounty-fl.gov Tue, May 21, 12:37 PM ' to James Sutcliffe You are viewing an attached message. Gmail can't verify the authenticity of attached messages. Received.Thanks,James. Cell Phone Reply Carol Schreck Aide to Commissioner Heather Carruthers Monroe County Florida 305-292-3430 Schreck-Carol@MonroeCounty-FL.gov On May 21,2019,at 12:21 PM,James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com>wrote: Hi Carol, As promised, I'm keeping you updated on my efforts at engaging Ms. Haag in a constructive conversation. She did call me this morning, bravo! She was not very collegial, oh my! By collegial I mean to say 'works well with others in a professional setting'. 1. When I asked what the scientists call the muck in the canal so could be on the same page as her engineer when we speak (shortly I expect a call, bravo!) she answered, "I'm not a scientist; how should I know?". 2. She does not answer pertinent and direct questions such as "What criteria did you give the engineer?" ( in his search for the most sustainable response to a very complex situation ). She chose not to give me an answer but chose instead to talk down to me and repeat what she had just said as if I was incapable of processing plain spoken English. As I assured Ms. Haag, I am a hard bitten optimist and I insist on a win/win solution to every knotty complexity confronting me. It has worked so far and I'm not anywhere near giving up patiently, mildly, kindly persisting in our common efforts to obtain sustainable resolutions to our interlocking issues. For the record, I envision an area wide answer to the floating weed issue. It will require high level cooperation between all stakeholders and yet in the end we shall reap so much more than the cooperation MGmail Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Updating your neighbors? 1 message James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Wed,May 22,2019 at 6:03 PM To:Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991 @gmail.com> Hi Larry, As I am reading your email from last fall, you asked everyone to keep the others updated on new developments. In all honesty, Larry, you may well owe your neighbors an update on the latest developments in that the county did not receive the funds to clear the muck from our canal as you were leading them to expect when they signed your request for the tax levy. I would be happy to accompany you as you give them this important news. Let us keep integrity with our neighbors, ok? Sincerely, Your loving neighbor, James Sutcliffe All the best, James Sutcliffe Founder of Intralux Inception(Healing Clay Products)&EarthBagShop.com MGmail Larry LeJeune<IeJeune1991@gmail.com> Fwd: How can we help you, dear neighbors? 1 message James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Thu,May 23,2019 at 2:11 PM To:James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com>,Jerry Shearin<shearinj@comcast.net>,Alice&Roger Meyer<meyerfam28@yahoo.com>,D'Ann Stone <dstone@tampabay.rr.com>,Ev<alpaca100@aol.com>,George&Gabrielle Kessel<gk30911@gmail.com>,James Stone<jstol@tampabay.rr.com>,Jeff Sevor<jsevor@mindspring.com>,Joelle Sackett<joellesnaturals@yahoo.com>,Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com>,michael reisner <miker0653@yahoo.com>,Pam LeJeune<pamlejeune@gmail.com>,Shannon McKinzey-Shirey<mckinzey@aol.com>,sharon ripley<ssb321@msn.com>, Shellie Sevor<ssevor@bellsouth.net> ----Forwarded message From:James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Date:Thu,May 23,2019 at 2:03 PM Subject:How can we help you,dear neighbors? To:James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> To our neighbors on Baitters Lane Canal, Greetings and good day to you all! We have always been all about updating our neighbors as soon as our situation changes. We find this to be the case, again, today. We are today ceasing our efforts on behalf our canal neighbors. Obviously this is not an easy decision for us. You can all see how passionate we are about love and justice for all in our democracy. You can all also hear how motivated we are to spare our pockets and yours the doubling of our tax burden- either a $900 per year or an $1800 increase ii! We trust that you know we care about you as individuals and we care for your individual needs. Those are the reasons why we resisted the county efforts to impose this unjust tax. Those are also the same reasons why we now cease and desist from our efforts on your behalf in this issue of the special taxing district; which you apparently choose to request. There are many, varied, reasons why we make this choice in this manner; just as there are many, varied, reasons for you to make your own choices. The two most important reasons as far as you, our neighbors, are concerned we shall now give you here for your own consideration: 1. Our conscience dictates thus- (Per email to Larry Lejeune this PM:-) Hi Larry, My conscience is telling me that I was unkind to you in my last email about integrity. My moral compass is now directing me to give you the field. My commitment to Our Director of Sustainablity includes a 'Love your neighbor as yourself clause'. When I find myself in violation of that clause I remove myself from the situation. Hats off to you good neighbor! James Sutcliffe The second reason concerns all of those reading this thread of community choice process. 2. No one has responded in accord to our position. Not publicly, not privately, not personally. The county informs us that no one has stepped forward to change their signature on the special taxing district request that you have made in a 90% majority nor have they indicated support for another proposal apart from the county's proposed "air curtain", even though you have until June 15 or so to email Rhonda Haag and request to receive your permission document back and officially vote "No" on added taxes"! We accept your choice. If we can help any of you in any other regard to any of your own county or state concerns or issues, we'd love to. It has been an interesting and informative process this past six months or so! Our best wishes for you all! James and Joelle Sutcliffe All the best, James Sutcliffe Founder of Intralux Inception(Healing Clay Products)&EarthBagS_hop.com All the best, James Sutcliffe Founder of Intralux Inception(Healing Clay Products)&EarthBagShop.com MGmail Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Sounding Board Request for June 19 BOCC Meeting 1 message James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Fri,May 31,2019 at 12:52 PM To:Al Alesi<alalesi@bellsouth.net>,Alfred&Marie Sciabarassi<sciabarassia@bellsouth.net>,Alice&Roger Meyer<meyerfam28@yahoo.com>,Amy Brown<hotflosser@gmail.com>,Evelyn&Tino Dimarco<alpaca100@aol.com>,Gabrielle Kessel<gk30911 @gmail.com>,George&Pat Ruggiano <geolpatl@bellsouth.net>,George Kessel<gap6126@gmail.com>,James Stone<jstol@tampabay.rr.com>,Jeff Sevor<jsevor@mindspring.com>,Jerry Shearin<shearinj@comcast.net>,Joe Milo<Mortgexp@comcast.net>,Joelle Sackett<joellesnaturals@yahoo.com>,Kent Reese <KJScuba1536@gmail.com>,Kevin Donohue<Dnregistry@juno.com>,Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com>,Laura Andre <lorealpalmbeach@gmail.com>,Lawrence Weinberg<l_weinberg@bellsouth.net>, Michael Reisner<miker0653@yahoo.com>,Mike&Sue Lang <bigpine33@aol.com>,Pam LeJeune<pamlejeune@gmail.com>,Rick Casey<rickcaseyjr@gmail.com>,Shannon McKinzey-Shirey<mckinzey@aol.com>, Sharon Clark<vanclarkel@hotmail.com>,Sharon Ripley<ssb321 @msn.com>,Shellie Sevor<ssevor@bellsouth.net>,Ted Dominick <Seascaperesort@comcast.net>,D'Ann Stone<dstone@tampabay.rr.com> Dear Board of County Commissioners and Ms. Ballard: I do suppose it would be pertinent to identify the nature of our intended contribution to the Board of County Commissioners deliberations on behalf of our collective best interests regarding sustainable water quality improvement. We believe we have a win/win solution that all could agree to. Wouldn't it be great if everyone could be right and no one needed to be wrong?As we keep saying to all those we speak to-we all want the best water we can have; the sooner the better. As the commissioners are well aware-water quality and property values go hand in hand. We have a proposal that would delight the USEPA and bring us needed funds for canal restoration. Let us explain how we would all benefit if we could put it into action. We are new at this public/private partnership process so please excuse us for anything inappropriate in procedure. We also ask you to do all you are able to assist us in the water quality improvement efforts which so concern us. Any of you are welcome to meet with us out at the canal, at your convenience. Again, our interest is your interest- sustainable water quality improvement, we believe people work better together than separate, wouldn't you each agree? Property values can only increase with clean water once again filling our canal, wouldn't you agree. Let's get our heads together on this and 'git 'er done!' Canal Owners Group- Baitters Lane Canal (@#266 between Baileys Lane and Witters Lane) All the best, James Sutcliffe Founder of Intralux Inception(Healing Clay Products)&EarthBagShop.com MGmail Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Re: AIR CURTAIN OPTIONS 1 message James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Sat,Jun 1,2019 at 6:03 PM To:Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Hi Larry, You truly are an honest man! I give you my sincere respect. James On Sat,Jun 1,2019 at 3:51 PM Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com>wrote: James Just state that you oppose the air curtain,but in the event it passes you choose either 5 or 20 years and either assessment by lot or by parcel. Thanks,Larry On Sat,Jun 1,2019,2:04 PM James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com>wrote: Hi Larry, I'm sending this privately because I don't want to appear to be grandstanding for the benefit of the other owners. I also wish to acknowledge your sincere efforts at building a consensus for the benefit of all concerned. Nothing happens without agreement. My own efforts to influence the outcome have provided ample evidence of the level of disagreement on this canal. I truly feel your pain; it is my own pain as well. My question is, obviously, how do I register a 'No' vote on the entire process and still make a preference known for a 5 year over a 20 year assessment if the majority is for proceeding with the public option rather than asking for a public/private partnership where they help us to establish majority rule among ourselves? I spoke with Gus Rios and he was very helpful and encouraging about the permitting. It would cost us $100 in fees plus engineering costs; my wife cleans for an engineer who has helped us in the past very reasonably. There are funds in the bank now and volunteers willing to work on the install. If there were no objection to the process we could file for and install an impeller system starting on Monday June 3, 2019. If the filing process were fasttracked for the benefit of 'sustainable water quality' which we are all committed to (ever since 1992 when the USEPA mandated our correction of the declining water quality situation.) Rhonda says "Fall at the earliest", which would most likely be December rather than September for their install date. The key, obviously, is agreement. Anyway, thanks for being as fair and informative as you possibly can be. I feel your frustration and again, it is my own. I think I saw somewhere in your information how to execute the vote so as to vote both for the private solution as well as being represented in the vote for '5' or '20'; 'lot' or 'parcel'. Could you please fill me in on that, if it is so? On Thu,May 30,2019 at 3:54 PM Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com>wrote: If you have not already voted,please respond and pick one from Part 1 and one from Part 2. Deadline to respond is midnight Sunday,June 2. Results will be submitted to the county and will be reflected in the information they send in the coming weeks. Part1 A. Assess by lot or B. Assess by parcel MGmail Larry LeJeune<Iejeune1991@gmail.com> Re: AIR CURTAIN OPTIONS 1 message James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Sat,Jun 1,2019 at 6:53 PM To:Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991 @gmail.com> Cc:Al Alesi<alalesi@bellsouth.net>,Alice&Roger Meyer<meyerfam28@yahoo.com>,Amy Brown<hotflosser@gmail.com>,D'Ann Stone <dstone@tampabay.rr.com>,Evelyn&Tino Dimarco<alpaca100@aol.com>,Gabrielle Kessel<gk30911 @gmail.com>,George&Pat Ruggiano <geolpatl@bellsouth.net>,George Kessel<gap6126@gmail.com>,James Stone<jsto1@tampabay.rr.com>,Jeff Sevor<jsevor@mindspring.com>,Jerry Shearin<shearinj@comcast.net>,Joe Milo<Mortgexp@comcast.net>,Joelle Sackett<joellesnaturals@yahoo.com>,Kent Reese <KJScuba1536@gmail.com>,Kevin Donohue<Dnregistry@juno.com>,Laura Andre<lorealpalmbeach@gmail.com>,Lawrence Weinberg <I_weinberg@bellsouth.net>,Michael Reisner<miker0653@yahoo.com>,Mike&Sue Lang<bigpine33@aol.com>,Pam LeJeune <pamlejeune@gmail.com>,Rick Casey<rickcaseyjr@gmail.com>,Shannon McKinzey-Shirey<mckinzey@aol.com>,Sharon Clark <vanclarkel@hotmail.com>,Sharon Ripley<ssb321@msn.com>,Shellie Sevor<ssevor@bellsouth.net>,Ted Dominick<Seascaperesort@comcast.net> First of all, I wish to acknowledge Larry for the transparency of this vote. Second, unity is best for us all; we all wish for sustainable water quality in our canal and by extension in the area. Third, may we all come together to cooperate with the majority in this case for the sake of our common interest. Fourth, obviously, we vote against the "air curtain" or any public operation of our canal's weed protection for the following reasons- 1. We feel we could have done a better job in the past 22 months, had we been given the cooperation of our public partners (the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the South Florida Water Management District, and the US Army Corps of Engineers, etc) in sustainable water quality improvement. 2. We believe the science behind the weed gate choice is flawed (the "air curtain" is unproven in this environment, it has been operational in fresh water with no tides) and engineering 'experts' resisted input from local observers on the ground who questioned the choice before it was even implemented. 3. As we all know, public policies result in excessive costs on the projects accomplished. Remember, it is not their own money they are spending, it is ours. Just because we are promised our money will definitely only be spent on our canal, that does not mean it will be spent efficiently. 4. Our goal is clean water in our canal. The county is not offering us clean water in our canal. 5. Like minded individuals have committed to working together with us in obtaining clean water in canal. Fifth, we agree to cooperate with the majority of our private neighbors in whatever they may decide. Sixth, in the event that the 13 people should respond in favor of asking the county to tax us an undisclosed amount for an undisclosed result in our water quality, we vote to limit that commitment to the minimum possible time and expense. To wit, our vote is as follows- Point one- 5 years Point two- per unit I'` 1 Gmail Larry LeJeune<Iejeune1991@gmail.com> RE: resident poll 1 message Haag-Rhonda<Haag-Rhonda@monroecounty-fl.gov> Mon,Jun 3,2019 at 4:36 PM To:Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991 @gmail.com> Thank you Larry. The County will review the results of this poll and get back to you with options the County could support. Rhonda Haag Director Sustainability Monroe County BOCC 102060 Overseas Hwy, Ste. 246 Key Largo, FL 33037 (305)453-8774 From:Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Sent:Monday,June 3,2019 4:34 PM To:Haag-Rhonda<Haag-Rhonda@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov> Subject:Re:resident poll Rhonda, 19 Homeowners voted and 5 did not vote. The final votes are: Assess by Lot 7 Assess by Parcel 11 5 Year Assessment 14 20 Year Assessment 5 The reason the Lot/Parcel vote is 18 instead of 19 is because James Sutcliffe voted"by unit"and I did not know if that meant lot or parcel. Two homeowners who were already against the canal(Sutcliffe and Sciabarassi)wanted to emphasize that they are opposed to any air curtain proposal and that voting for an option does not change this. One homeowner(DiMarco)who currently supports the air curtain,wanted to highlight that there support is contingent upon the outcome of how the assessment is implemented and that they still take exception with how the county has handled it. MGmail Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> FW: Email to Sen. Flores 1 message Haag-Rhonda<Haag-Rhonda@monroecounty-fl.gov> Mon,Jun 3,2019 at 4:56 PM To:Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Per request... ---Forwarded message-- From:James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Date:Mon,Jun 3,2019 at 1:11 PM Subject:Email to Sen.Flores To:James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> As it was suggested to me, just to get all the stakeholders involved, this email was sent to Senator Flores today. We wish to inform you of our efforts at protecting and clearing our canal of weeds blown in by the wind since Irma drowned our "air curtain" installed by the county at ground level in an AE 10 Zone. After a 1.5 MS dredging the canal now has several feet of rotted vegetation once again. There has been no action by the county to replace any protection for us in the 21 months since Irma destroyed their installation which they claim was 'self insured'. We are approaching the county and DEP for assistance in permitting and installing our own protection. We simply wish to ask for your assistance in asking the county, DEP and SFWMD to work with us. Thank you for your kind attention. Given the results of the county's efforts so far we feel we deserve our chance to do it sooner and cheaper and with our own on site attention to the many details involved. If you wish to get involved we would be happy to supply all the details. I will be in Miami on Thursday, June 6 if you have a moment then or someone in your office does. Thank you. We all work better when we all work together, Monroe County BULL' _ 102060 Overseas Hwy,Ste.246 Key Largo,FL 33037 (305)453-8774 From:James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday,June 5,2019 9:48 AM To: Haag-Rhonda<Haag-Rhonda@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov>;Sattelberger,Danielle<dsattelb@sfwmd.gov>;Conmy, Barbara<bconmy@sfwmd.gov>;Cerullo,Terry<Terry.Cerullo@floridadep.gov>;Holly.Raschein@mnyfloridahouse.gov; Gus.Rios@FloridaDEP.gov;bcc:ALFRED SCIABARASSI<sciabarassia@bellsouth.net>;Evelyn&Tino Dimarco <alpaca100@aol.com>;David K.<koppelds@yahoo.com>;Rick Casey<rickcaseyjr@gmail.com>;Al Alesi <alalesi@bellsouth.net>;Kent Reese<KJScuba1536@gmail.com> Subject:Weed gate permit transfer to CSG Hi Rhonda, Before we talk, I have not had breakfast yet, (I've been on the phone with my mother, her brother and her nursing home in Ohio). It would be beneficial if the permit allowing for installation of the weed gate were in our name so that we could properly insure it. My neighbors insist that this protection be in place as soon as possible. We are prepared to fund and install this gate immediately. If you cannot confirm a better timetable we see no reason that you should not transfer the permit to our name so that may be done most expeditiously, effectively and sustainably in every regard. James Working together for sustainable water quality improvement, James Allen Sutcliffe, Representative, Canal Stewards Group, Baitters Lane Canal, Big Pine Key, FL. USA From: James Sutcliffe <jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2019 10:33 AM To: Sattelberger, Danielle; Haag-Rhonda; Cerullo, Terry; cc: Conmy, Barbara; Stone, Trisha; Gus.Rios@floridadep.gov; Holly.Raschein@myfloridahouse.gov; bcc:ALFRED SCIABARASSI; Rick Casey; David K.; Evelyn &Tino Dimarco; boccdis4@monroecounty- fl.gov; boccdisl @monroecounty-fl.gov; BOCCDIS3; BOCCDIS5; BOCCDIS2 Subject: Re:Weed gate permit Hi all, We would like to update all the stakeholders in the ongoing water quality improvement initiative regarding Baitters Lane Canal, Big Pine Key, Florida ('.gov' designation Canal #266). An aside in regards the name- The Canal Stewards Group refers to canals by the names of the adjoining streets. We chose this nomenclature because it is user friendly and carries necessary practical information for all concerned. We encourage the public sector to join us in this commonsense approach. in 2015 the county spent 1 .5 Million Dollars to dredge accumulated vegetative sediments from our canal. They then permited and installed a weed gate on our canal. Hurricane Irma damaged the equipment and it ceased opeeration. One year ago my neighbors approached the county for assistance in protecting our canal from sea grass influx which then rots and settles to the bottom to the detriment of the benthic 1 community (sea bed dwellers) below. The county responded with an effort to establish a Special Taxation District (STD) hereinafter referred to as STD. This, of course made sense to the County. The federal government, USEPA had requested action on water quality improvement in 1992 as an unfunded mandate. What choice did the county have? They apparently saw none. My wife, our neighbors and myself pushed back against this effort; preferring our own self determination . On Sunday June 2nd, 2019 we concluded a vote as to our willingness to request a STD of our own. The vote was transparent and public and it reflected the wishes of our neighbors to not request a STD. We enquired of the permitting agency and received the response that the permit is still valid We have proposed an alternative to public management of the navigable waterways of our community. We have the desire to reinstall the exact same equipment under the existing permit. We are able to commence funding and installation immediately. We request the public sector to cooperate with us in every regard so that water quality improvement for our canal and the entire area may be expeditiously and sustainably carried out by 2 MGmail Larry LeJeune<Iejeune1991@gmail.com> Re: Weed Permit transfer to CSG 1 message James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Wed,Jun 5,2019 at 12:23 PM To:Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Cc:Haag-Rhonda<Haag-Rhonda@monroecounty-fl.gov>,"Holly.Raschein@myfloridahouse.gov"<Holly.Raschein@myfloridahouse.gov>,"Rios,Gus" <Gus.Rios@floridadep.gov>,"Sattelberger,Danielle"<dsattelb@sfwmd.gov>,"Cc:Conmy,Barbara"<bconmy@sfwmd.gov>,"Cerullo,Terry" <Terry.Cerullo@floridadep.gov> Bcc:lejeune1991@gmail.com Hello to all: If I have addressed this email to any of my neighbors that does not imply their agreement, only their right to be informed. Several owners have indicated a willingness to operate and maintain a private weed gate along with myself and my wife. If the public sector would support our fair, equitable, transparent and sustainable private arrangement then we feel a majority would be in favor the private option. Seven votes for a Special Taxation District (STD) is not a majority out of 25 parcels subject to the tax. We wish to install the exact same system as the one installed by the county in 2015. We have presented a funding mechanism that is both fair, equitable, transparent and sustainable. If the county can do it quicker and faster they are welcome to do so, as long as they leave it in place after five years when we take over the O&M as the vote indicated our collective will to be. The county claims they have taxpayer support but this vote does not indicate that. Larry, what happened to the majority rules? The majority is not voting for this STD. Although this email would give them that choice, in all fairness. Respectfully your neighbor, James On Wed,Jun 5,2019 at 11:43 AM Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com>wrote: Rhonda, Relative to the email below from Mr.Sutcliffe,let me state that I believe the majority of homeowners still support the proposal to have a county installed and maintained air curtain. Mr.Sutclife has flooded both the county and the canal homeowners with misinformation(which I can factually disprove)in an attempt to undermine our efforts to finally have the canal protected. I see that Mr.Sutcliffe has included selective homeowners on the email which gives the impression that they support his proposal. I don't know if they do or do not,but to date,none of the homeowners who originally supported the air curtain(with the exception of Mr/Mrs Sciabarassi)have indicated to me that they wanted to have their support withdrawn. One homeowner(Mr/Mrs DiMarco)has qualified their support to be based on the original county proposal to assess by parcel(which I believe is supported by our latest homeowner vote),and also expressed concems beyond that. Unlike Mr.Sutcliffe who has appointed himself as spokesman for a fictitious organization he has created, I will continue to only provide the county with the written documents from the homeowners in which they express their views,and will never presume to speak for anyone except myself. Based on the latest homeowner vote(of which emails from all homeowners that voted have been sent to the county and are public record),it appears the majority support the assessment by parcel,which I believe will be approximately$960 per month for a term of 5 years. I understand this vote still must to be reviewed and accepted by the county. This is in line with the original proposal from the county in November of 2018,which was supported by 19 homeowners. Specific to the request for transfer of the permit: • Since the permit is issued jointly to me and the county, I will not agree to transfer of the permit to any private entity. • I will not allow of access to my property by anyone other than county, or county appointed, individuals or companies. • I will not allow anchoring to my property of anything other than a county supported system. • I will not allow electrical to be metered on my property, nor will I allow electrical to be run through my property to an offsite meter. • I will not incur the liability of having anyone other than a county approved, licensed and bonded, firm perform any work, access my property in any way, or perform any other function that will cause me to be libel for any injury of damage that may occur. • If Mr. Sutcliffe, or anyone else, attempts to install a system on the interior of the canal that will cause excessive weed build up in front of my house (therefore having a negative impact on the resale value) I intend to file a civil lawsuit against all parties involved. I ask that you please, within appropriate guidelines, make my personal position known to all involved county, state or federal agencies. Sincerely, Larry LeJeune 30990 Bailey Ln Big Pine Key, FL 33043 Hi Rhonda, Before we talk, I have not had breakfast yet, (I've been on the phone with my mother, her brother and her nursing home in Ohio). It would be beneficial if the permit allowing for installation of the weed gate were in our name so that we could properly insure it. My neighbors insist that this protection be in place as soon as possible. We are prepared to fund and install this gate immediately. If you cannot confirm a better timetable we see no reason that you should not transfer the permit to our name so that may be done most expeditiously, effectively and sustainably in every regard. James MGmail Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com> Re: Weed Permit transfer to CSG 1 message James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Wed,Jun 5,2019 at 1:28 PM To:Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991@gmail.com>,"cc: Haag-Rhonda"<Haag-Rhonda@monroecounty-fl.gov>,"Holly.Raschein@myfloridahouse.gov" <Holly.Raschein@myfloridahouse.gov>,"Rios,Gus"<Gus.Rios@floridadep.gov>,"Sattelberger,Danielle"<dsattelb@sfwmd.gov>,"Cc:Conmy,Barbara" <bconmy@sfwmd.gov>,"Cerullo,Terry"<Terry.Cerullo@floridadep.gov>,"bcc:Evelyn&Tino Dimarco"<alpaca100@aol.com>,Al Alesi <alalesi@bellsouth.net>, Rick Casey<rickcaseyjr@gmail.com>, Kent Reese<KJScuba1536@gmail.com>,"David K."<koppelds@yahoo.com>,"bcc: ALFRED SCIABARASSI"<sciabarassia@bellsouth.net>,Alice&Roger Meyer<meyerfam28@yahoo.com>,Amy Brown<hotflosser@gmail.com>, D'Ann Stone<dstone@tampabay.rr.com>,Gabrielle Kessel<gk30911@gmail.com>,George&Pat Ruggiano<geolpatl@bellsouth.net>,George Kessel <gap6126@gmail.com>,James Stone<jstol@tampabay.rr.com>,Jeff Sevor<jsevor@mindspring.com>,Jerry Shearin<shearinj@comcast.net>,Joe Milo <Mortgexp@comcast.net>,Joelle Sackett<joellesnaturals@yahoo.com>, Kevin Donohue<Dnregistry@juno.com>, Laura Andre <lorealpalmbeach@gmail.com>, Lawrence Weinberg<l_weinberg@bellsouth.net>, Michael Reisner<miker0653@yahoo.com>,Mike&Sue Lang <bigpine33@aol.com>,Pam LeJeune<pamlejeune@gmail.com>,Shannon McKinzey-Shirey<mckinzey@aol.com>, Sharon Clark <vanclarkel@hotmail.com>,Sharon Ripley<ssb321@msn.com>,Shellie Sevor<ssevor@bellsouth.net>,Ted Dominick<Seascaperesort@comcast.net>, James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com> Hi all: I apologize. Sorry. I will stop the emails. I will work through channels established for us. will go along with the plan to pay O&M for five years. Let's all settle down and have some fun together. James On Wed,Jun 5,2019 at 12:23 PM James Sutcliffe<jms.sutcliffe@gmail.com>wrote: Hello to all: If I have addressed this email to any of my neighbors that does not imply their agreement, only their right to be informed. Several owners have indicated a willingness to operate and maintain a private weed gate along with myself and my wife. If the public sector would support our fair, equitable, transparent and sustainable private arrangement then we feel a majority would be in favor the private option. Seven votes for a Special Taxation District (STD) is not a majority out of 25 parcels subject to the tax. We wish to install the exact same system as the one installed by the county in 2015. We have presented a funding mechanism that is both fair, equitable, transparent and sustainable. If the county can do it quicker and faster they are welcome to do so, as long as they leave it in place after five years when we take over the O&M as the vote indicated our collective will to be. The county claims they have taxpayer support but this vote does not indicate that. Larry, what happened to the majority rules? The majority is not voting for this STD. Although this email would give them that choice, in all fairness. Respectfully your neighbor, James On Wed,Jun 5,2019 at 11:43 AM Larry LeJeune<lejeune1991 @gmail.com>wrote: Rhonda, Relative to the email below from Mr.Sutcliffe,let me state that I believe the majority of homeowners still support the proposal to have a county installed and maintained air curtain. Mr. Sutclife has flooded both the county and the canal homeowners with misinformation(which I can factually disprove)in an attempt to undermine our efforts to finally have the canal protected.