Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Dune preservation will be put to a vote

When tempers flare, the Indian Rocks Beach commission decides 3-2 to support a townwide referendum.

By SHEILA MULLANE ESTRADA
Published November 13, 2005

INDIAN ROCKS BEACH - More than two years of study and debate ended in a raucous meeting Tuesday, as the commission opted to let city residents decide at the ballot box the future of a proposed dune preservation zone.

"Let the people decide for themselves," urged Jonathan Hurley, chairman of a committee that initially recommended the ordinance.

The purpose of the proposed ordinance was to encourage growth of dunes along the city's 2.7 miles of beach by regulating beach usage and plantings in a 50-foot corridor between beachfront homes and the Gulf of Mexico.

The idea was to create a natural, protective barrier that would reduce damage to upland buildings and properties in the event of hurricanes and major storms.

"The beach is not just to benefit adjacent property owners, it is the entire town's beach. Let the town's people decide what to do with the town's beach," Hurley said.

In a series of meetings over the past year, beach property owners consistently opposed the new regulations. Tuesday, as the commission was poised to approve the final wording of the document, tempers flared.

After listening to hours of emotional debate, Mayor Bill Ockunzzi and Commissioners Jean Scott and R.B. Johnson agreed to support a townwide referendum vote, while Commissioners Jeremiah Carmody and Jim Palamara did not.

Putting the issue on the ballot, presumably during the March election, angered many of the beach property owners who wanted the commission to completely drop the proposal.

As the commission tried to take up other issues at its workshop session, residents in the audience continued to shout and reiterated earlier threats to support candidates opposing commissioners in the next election.

After asking several times for the audience to quiet down, Ockunzzi finally told the residents to "please go outside".

During the hours-long discussion, shouts of "squash it . . . throw it away . . . get rid of it" repeatedly filled the commission chambers as beachfront residents argued the ordinance violated their property rights and threatened the value of their homes.

Residents questioned why the commission was still talking about the dune zone. "We keep coming here and telling you we don't want regulations. It's getting to look like you are just stuck on stupid. Leave the beach alone," one said to loud applause from the audience.

"Whose idea was this?" another resident asked, adding, "There may be some folks with time on their hands who would find it worthwhile to sponsor opposing candidates and campaign against those commissioners."

Residents in the audience then demanded commissioners in favor of the dune plan to "raise your hands," shouting "we want to know now" and "drop it."

Carmody, who previously had expressed concern over the regulations' effect on the rights of beach property owners, asked the audience if they didn't want "a little bit of a buffer" against people he said were "out of control" on weekends and "trashing" the beach.

The audience responded with shouts of "no" and "you don't listen."

At one point in the debate, Ockunzzi said the city has a "responsibility for stewardship" of the beach.

He tried to explain that the commission had removed any language that would infringe on waterfront property owners' rights to their individual stretch of beach. Also gone was any protection for coastal sandspurs or prohibitions against "non-destructive" use of the the dune zone.

Still to be decided is the specific wording of a referendum that will ask voters whether the city's beaches should have a dune preservation zone.

[Last modified November 13, 2005, 03:00:43]