 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
In this court, drier is better
By JOSH ZIMMER © St. Petersburg Times, published November 12, 2000 TAMPA -- Frank Reinhart entered a courtroom last week looking bored and irritated. Instead of coaching his son's baseball team, he was challenging a citation in city water court, Tampa's legal venue for people and businesses accused of violating strict local watering restrictions. Dressed in khakis and a white polo shirt inscribed with the name of his temporary staffing business, he plopped himself down on a wooden bench. He was accused of hosing his North Melrose Avenue yard three months ago on a non-permitted watering day. Oops. Potential fine: $35 civil penalty plus court fees. Reinhart, who lives in Stony Point, was having none of it. "They just got the wrong house," he said. "No. 1, my lawn is dead. We haven't broken any of the rules, probably the only ones on our street." As other alleged abusers of Tampa Bay's precious water resources waited outside the courtroom for the 5:30 p.m. proceedings before Hearing Officer William Foster, they seemed out of place against the gray concrete walls of the Circuit Court annex. They were clean-cut, almost angelic, compared to the crowd gathering for the traffic court to follow. Water court is a creature of meager rainfall -- more than 10 years of it. Since Hillsborough County and Tampa tightened already rigid watering restrictions early this year, it has been a busier place. Every month, despite the drought's crippling effect on the aquifer and the Hillsborough River, hundreds of people and businesses remain ignorant of the rules or treat them with outright disdain. After a three-month lull during the summer rainy season, Tampa inspectors wrote nearly 700 citations in October, the most since May's dire public warnings about the drought. Inspectors for the unincorporated county handed out more citations last month than they have all year. Most recipients choose to pay their fines and avoid the hassle of attending city water court, held on the first Tuesday of every month, or county water court, held on the second Tuesday. Dozens, however, ignore their tickets or challenge the charges. As determined as some are about skirting the rules, the court is just as serious about making examples of bad behavior. "They mean business because of the situation we're in," said Rick Silverman, a traffic court lawyer who appeared on behalf of a client cited for watering on a non-watering day. "I can see what they're trying to do here. They really need a deterrent to keep people in a mind-set." Foster, a no-nonsense water court officiator for the past three years, plows through a thick stack of yellow case folders. He doesn't want to delay traffic court, which he also runs. Water inspectors approach the dais for each case to justify the citations they issued at a variety of odd hours when people don't expect to be caught, such as 2:24 a.m., 4:57 a.m. and 5:27 a.m. Inspectors, temporary employees hired by the city through the private Techstaff company, are regularly sent out on Friday nights and Saturday mornings, when most assume their local governments are shut down for the weekend. So many citations are being written that recent violators will have to wait until fall 2001 to challenge their tickets in court. Most of the names Foster calls out never appear. He shows little sympathy for them. Those who do take time away from their busy lives to appear in court usually get a break. For example, a woman who claimed she misinterpreted the zero at the end of her address for an odd number and watered on the wrong day received a $40 penalty and was not charged court costs. But an Eckerd Drug store on New Tampa Boulevard, which did not send a representative, got hit with a $450 penalty plus $200 in court costs. Residents who don't appear regularly face $75 penalties. As a hearing officer, Foster can only make recommendations. A judge generally signs off on all of his decisions. "They at least had the courtesy to appear," Foster said after the most recent water court. "The court goes through an expensive process. If they don't respond, I think it's appropriate they would have to shoulder a burden of the costs." Foster, a private civil lawyer most of the month, sees himself as a vital component in the conservation effort. He tries to be fair, going through the facts of each case, assessing the sincerity of the defendants and giving them a chance to prove their points. Records from landscapers and sprinkler companies help determine whether a violation was intentional or an accident. In case of new fertilizer, people can hose it into their lawns but that's it. They must stick to their watering days. "I don't think the majority of people out there are trying to circumvent the watering restrictions," Foster said, acknowledging that differences between the city and county ordinances confuse some people. But "it's kind of like if a dog bites you, the owner is responsible for the dog. You empathize with someone but at the same time they have to be responsible for their own property." In his opinion, more frequent media announcements of the water restrictions would help reduce infractions. And users, if they currently rely on electronic timers, should turn to mechanical ones to avoid technical foul-ups. On their way from the courtroom, city water conservation specialist Neil Mingledorff and Techstaff owner Adam Mainzer mused about their uphill climb. "How many citations does it take to make a change?" Mingledorff wondered. Reached later in the week, Mainzer said that on the Wednesday after water court, inspectors wrote more than 100 tickets. "It's amazing," he said. Reinhart brusquely left the courtroom after his case was heard. He believes the case against him was shaky at best. There were questions about whether the inspector actually saw an infraction on North Melrose, his street, or on nearby South and West Melrose avenues. All three have houses with the same number. What's more, he said, his certified letter containing the citation arrived on July 8, more than 30 days after his legally allotted time to respond. Foster found him guilty but waived any penalties. "I'm not happy about that," Reinhart said before heading down the escalator into the night.
 © 2006 • All Rights Reserved • Tampa Bay Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111 
|
|
