 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Mixed reactions greet Halls River memo
By BRIDGET HALL GRUMET, Times Staff Writer INVERNESS -- The clerk of courts is politely ignoring the request, county planners are cautious of what they say, and county commissioners are divided on whether their attorney acted appropriately. All told, however, County Attorney Robert Battista stands behind his memorandums advising county employees not to discuss the Halls River Retreat project with the public as the issue heads into litigation. Although part of his memo from Monday erroneously told county staffers that all documents related to the Homosassa condominium project were now exempt from the public records law, Battista said he quickly rescinded that directive Tuesday before any harm was done. "I have a duty to my client, even a public client the same as a private client, to pursue the defenses that are available," Battista said, noting that the first legal challenges to the 54-unit condominium project were filed Wednesday. (The challenges from Carl Bertoch, attorney for the Protect Our Waterways ad hoc group against the condominiums, claim the county violated its Comprehensive Plan by approving the dense development in an area where the plan restricts growth.) Part of the county's defense includes tracking which project documents are being requested by the public, which could give Battista an indication of the opponents' legal strategy, he said. Battista's memos ask county employees to tell his office when a public records request is made and which documents are provided on the Halls River Retreat project. Clerk of the Circuit Court Betty Strifler, whose office maintains the documents and minutes from commission meetings, has respectfully refused. "I'm just very uncomfortable with that request," Strifler said Wednesday. "I know it is not my responsibility to keep a log and report to anybody." Strifler said state laws are designed to encourage, not impair, public access to records. Her deputy clerks will continue to help residents find records, but will not start tracking or reporting requests on a certain project, she said. Nor will Battista's memo change things at the Property Appraiser's Office, which did not even receive it. "I don't think (Battista) has any authority over us," Deputy Property Appraiser Melanie Hensley said. County planners, however, have taken Battista's request to heart. "We provide general information and we provide answers to questions within reason," said Gary Maidhof, director of development services. "We know the difference between asking a question and being deposed. . . . If you ask me what date was the application filed, or how many letters of opposition we've received, those are legitimate questions. If you want to say what was the staff discussion on this particular issue, we'll do that when we're deposed." As for keeping the county attorney's office abreast of records requests, Maidhof said, "We do that routinely anyway" with other cases in litigation. Commissioners' reactions to Battista's memos have run the gamut from indifference to ire. "I did not speak to (Battista) about how this happened," commission Chairman Jim Fowler said, referring to the mixup about which records are available to the public. "I just assumed there was some kind of glitch in communication between him and whoever he dictated the memo to." "It wasn't an issue with me," Fowler said. While understanding that mistakes can happen, Commissioner Roger Batchelor said Battista should be more careful when drafting future memos. "Just make sure when you issue a statement or directive of that nature, make sure you're right on," Batchelor said. Commissioners Gary Bartell and Vicki Phillips, however, said Battista should have brought the issue to the commission Tuesday before sending out memos affecting public records or employees. "He needs to consult with the Board of County Commissioners any time he takes that type of action or any type of action that might adversely affect the county," Bartell said. "He doesn't have the authority or the ability to initiate that on his own." "I think the proper thing would have been for him to read the statute and think about what he was going to do and advise the board and then do it," Phillips added. "I think not only did he overreach, but he overreacted, and I don't know what he was reacting to. We weren't even in litigation yet." Because he quickly rescinded the lockdown on Halls River Retreat records, Battista said there was little real damage. "The harm done was minimal, but obviously the impression is there for those who wish to assume there is something behind this hiding of information," Battista said. -- Bridget Hall Grumet can be reached at 860-7303 or bhall@sptimes.com. PREVIOUS COVERAGE:Blackout on Halls River records ends Court next stop for Halls River condo project
 © 2006 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111 
|
Citrus Times |
