Saw this on the news tonight that the BCC is being sued by Jolly Bay LLC for not approving their development. Normally I would include a link to the article, but it seems to have disappeared from all the local news outlets.
Replies
293
Banned
Saw this on the news tonight that the BCC is being sued by Jolly Bay LLC for not approving their development. Normally I would include a link to the article, but it seems to have disappeared from all the local news outlets.
Another case of the County changing the rules in real time in order to impress their will upon a citizen. Dealing off the bottom of the deck for the greater good. Both the Florida and United States Constitutions sit opposite the dictum, "The ends justify the means"
Whether or not a project is beloved by the population has no bearing on the mechanics of our Land Development Code.
Beach Lover
Jolly Bay files suit against the county
December 2, 2008 - 11:51 AM
Business Wire
FREEPORT ? (BUSINESS WIRE) ? Landowner Jolly Bay LLC, a company dedicated to responsible and sustainable growth for Walton County and its residents, has filed a second lawsuit against Walton County, Florida, pursuant to Florida Statute 163, in Walton County First Judicial Circuit Court, in connection with the Board of County Commissioner?s denial of its project in September based on an unadopted standard made up by county staff after receiving public opposition to the project.
The lawsuit seeks monetary damages against the county for what the company calls the unconstitutional taking of Jolly Bay?s property and for violations of its constitutional rights, including reimbursement of Jolly Bay?s attorneys? fees and costs.
The lawsuit also requests that the court declare that the county unlawfully denied the project based upon the unadopted standard and order the immediate approval of the project.
The Jolly Bay project is located one half mile from the northeast 331 bridge landing off Jolly Bay Road and included an upscale recreational vehicle park, a bed & breakfast, a 73-unit condominium, a boat docking facility and commercial spaces. Setting this project apart from other local projects, the plans had the project situated on 17 acres of a 60-acre tract of land in order to preserve 43 acres of natural landscape, and to ensure the integrity of, and compatibility with the surrounding area.
?Jolly Bay spent a lot of time and money working on the plans for an upscale project that was continually brought before the planning department staff over a two-year period before submittal of an application to ensure that the project met all Walton County Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code requirements,? said Dana Matthews, of Matthews and Hawkins, attorney for Jolly Bay. ?Despite those efforts, Jolly Bay now finds itself in the position of having to sue to protect its constitutional rights and to seek millions of dollars in monetary damages from the County and its taxpayers.?
December 2, 2008 - 11:51 AM
Business Wire
FREEPORT ? (BUSINESS WIRE) ? Landowner Jolly Bay LLC, a company dedicated to responsible and sustainable growth for Walton County and its residents, has filed a second lawsuit against Walton County, Florida, pursuant to Florida Statute 163, in Walton County First Judicial Circuit Court, in connection with the Board of County Commissioner?s denial of its project in September based on an unadopted standard made up by county staff after receiving public opposition to the project.
The lawsuit seeks monetary damages against the county for what the company calls the unconstitutional taking of Jolly Bay?s property and for violations of its constitutional rights, including reimbursement of Jolly Bay?s attorneys? fees and costs.
The lawsuit also requests that the court declare that the county unlawfully denied the project based upon the unadopted standard and order the immediate approval of the project.
The Jolly Bay project is located one half mile from the northeast 331 bridge landing off Jolly Bay Road and included an upscale recreational vehicle park, a bed & breakfast, a 73-unit condominium, a boat docking facility and commercial spaces. Setting this project apart from other local projects, the plans had the project situated on 17 acres of a 60-acre tract of land in order to preserve 43 acres of natural landscape, and to ensure the integrity of, and compatibility with the surrounding area.
?Jolly Bay spent a lot of time and money working on the plans for an upscale project that was continually brought before the planning department staff over a two-year period before submittal of an application to ensure that the project met all Walton County Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code requirements,? said Dana Matthews, of Matthews and Hawkins, attorney for Jolly Bay. ?Despite those efforts, Jolly Bay now finds itself in the position of having to sue to protect its constitutional rights and to seek millions of dollars in monetary damages from the County and its taxpayers.?
SoWal Expert
No exactly, aabsolute. You really need some history, going back to the pre-planning stage, as well as the property owners' final push at the County. I won't go into detail, as it was a very lengthy final review, taking one regular meeting and two special meetings, each one being several hours. If they had been the least bit familiar with our Land Use Code, they would have known that their dog wouldn't hunt.
Beach Fanatic
The Jolly Bay developers probably figure that winning a suit against Walton County would be easier than making a dime on the actual development of this parcel, at this point in the economy.
Beach Comber
Jolly Bay LLC should send the county a thank you letter.
Banned
The 2 suits are seperate and distinct actions. There is the suit for damages and there is the Writ for Certiorari. The Writ for Cert. could take just weeks, but that would require a County Judge ruling against the County.
All of this is outrageous to me. We have a citizen/neighbor who has to sue his own Local Government. The rest of us have to pay the County's legal bills no matter what and ultimately another settlement if the citizen prevails.
All of this is outrageous to me. We have a citizen/neighbor who has to sue his own Local Government. The rest of us have to pay the County's legal bills no matter what and ultimately another settlement if the citizen prevails.
Banned
No exactly, aabsolute. You really need some history, going back to the pre-planning stage, as well as the property owners' final push at the County. I won't go into detail, as it was a very lengthy final review, taking one regular meeting and two special meetings, each one being several hours. If they had been the least bit familiar with our Land Use Code, they would have known that their dog wouldn't hunt.
1 question Smiling Joe: Why did the County rush to enact a height restriction North of the bay after the Jolly Bay application was submitted?
SoWal Expert
There is absolutely no reason why the County cannot win these suits. Just another case of an attorney trying to get paid.
SoWal Expert
The applicants project was not rejected based upon structure height. Don't attempt to set up a false premise.
Banned
There is absolutely no reason why the County cannot win these suits. Just another case of an attorney trying to get paid.
I agree that the Plaintiff's attorney is setting up for payment.
Beach Fanatic
We have a citizen/neighbor who has to sue his own Local Government. The rest of us have to pay the County's legal bills no matter what and ultimately another settlement if the citizen prevails.
They don't have to sue. They should take a step back and realize that trying to push a condominium at Jolly Bay is simply ridiculous, and not at all neighborly when all of the neighbors oppose it.
Banned
The applicants project was not rejected based upon structure height. Don't attempt to set up a false premise.
Is that your answer to my simple question?
Banned
They don't have to sue. They should take a step back and realize that trying to push a condominium at Jolly Bay is simply ridiculous, and not at all neighborly when all of the neighbors oppose it.
I have some property I want to develop. How can I show you my plans prior to submitting for the Development Order so I can get your thoughts on what I should do?
SoWal Expert
Is that your answer to my simple question?yes.
SoWal Expert
I have some property I want to develop. How can I show you my plans prior to submitting for the Development Order so I can get your thoughts on what I should do?
That depends. Are you wondering how you can get neighbors' thoughts, or the County's. Also, when you say "prior to submitting for the DO," do you mean to the Planning Dept, Planning Commission, or the BCC?
Beach Fanatic
My thought: They knew the project wouldn't get approved the whole time so they planned the whole time to sue, for money, not approval.
Does anyone care about compatibility anymore?
Does anyone care about compatibility anymore?
SoWal Expert
...and, it might be said that it took two years to get rejected because lawyers get paid by the hour.
Beach Crab
There could be another one in the pipeline. Private meetings with the staff and planning Director, put another developer in one direction and then would not stand behind their position in a public forum..stay tuned!
Beach Fanatic
Im sure in this economy there will be several people beginning to sue the county, still doesn't mean any of them have any merit.
SoWal Expert
If you think about it, the lawyers have potential to make more money with a lawsuit, than they did by representing the applicant for the submission of this development. (I'm not suggesting that an attorney would want their applicants' development to be rejected in order to make more money, because that wouldn't get the attorneys much future business, but it is interesting that they would stand to get paid more by winning a lawsuit, or settling out of Court. As someone else mentioned, the applicants, too, would stand to gain more money by winning a lawsuit or settling out of Court, than they would by developing this property in this current market. )
Beach Comber
The release discussed in this thread
Walton County, Florida Served with $3.35 Million Bert Harris Claim from Jolly Bay LLC
Print article 
Refer to a friend
? Business Wire 2008
2008-12-17 20:27:03 -
Walton County, Florida Served with $3.35 Million Bert Harris Claim from Jolly Bay LLC
Print article Refer to a friend ? Business Wire 2008
2008-12-17 20:27:03 -
www.jollybay.com - Landowner Jolly Bay LLC, a company dedicated to responsible and sustainable growth for Walton County and its residents, has filed a notice of claim for $3,350,000.00 against Walton County, Florida under Florida's Bert J. Harris Private Property Rights Protection Act. The Bert J. Harris Act provides for monetary compensation, including attorneys' fees
and costs, to private property owners when changing County regulations diminish the value of private property. The claim and two previously filed lawsuits against the County by Jolly Bay are the result of the County's September 22, 2008 denial of its mixed use development.
"Jolly Bay was unfairly treated by the County and the Bert Harris Act was adopted by the Legislature to give landowners like Jolly Bay a legal remedy," said Ronald Weaver of Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Alhadeff & Sitterson, P.A, attorneys specializing in Bert Harris claims and land use litigation. "Dozens of Florida governments are facing hundreds of millions of dollars of combined claims for interfering illegally with property owners' legitimate rights."
Weaver explained that over a two-year period the landowners and County staff met numerous times to discuss the design of the project and up until the point of public opposition to the height of the proposed condominium, County staff affirmed that the project and proposed condominium met all County requirements. In reaction to the public opposition at a time when the County had no adopted height limitation that could be lawfully applied to the project, Weaver further explained, County staff made up and changed un-adopted rules and standards over a year period as they delayed the project. Although the citizens' own Planning Commission voted unanimously for the project, the Board of County Commissioners, after an initial motion to approve the project, ultimately applied a made-up, un-adopted height standard to deny the project. "My clients spent in good faith over $625,000.00 on the application process based on the County staff's repeated affirmations and the clear lack of any applicable height limitation in the adopted regulations," said Weaver.
"What is most troubling," Weaver added, "is that Walton County's action in denying the project based on an un-adopted, subjective height standard is directly contrary to the Circuit Court's previous clear instructions to Walton County in the 2001 Inlet Beach Capital case.? In the 2001 Inlet Beach Capital case, the Circuit Court reversed the Walton County Board of County Commissioners' denial of a project and told Walton County that it cannot base the denial of projects on its own un-adopted subjective interpretations of its land use regulations because landowners must have notice of the conditions that they must meet in order to improve their property.
Weaver further added that the County has 180 days to respond to the notice of claim with a written settlement offer acceptable to the owners, or Jolly Bay LLC will have no other choice but to go to the court system with a third lawsuit against the County and seek over $3.35 million in damages, plus additional attorneys' fees and costs.
The Jolly Bay project is located 1/2 mile from the northeast 331 bridge landing off Jolly Bay Road and included an upscale recreational vehicle park, a bed & breakfast, a 73-unit condominium, a boat docking facility and commercial spaces. The plans had the project situated on 17 acres of a 60-acre tract of land in order to preserve 43 acres of natural beauty, and to ensure the integrity of, and compatibility with, the surrounding area.
Jolly Bay LLC is represented by Dana Matthews and Scott Work of Matthews & Hawkins, P.A., at 850-837-3662, by Barbara Wihite and Ron Weaver of Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Alhadeff & Sitterson, P.A., at 813-223-4800 and by Robert Apgar and David Jordan of Greenburg Traurig, P.A., at 850-222-6891.
SoWal Expert
Jolly Bay LLC, a company dedicated to responsible and sustainable growth for Walton County and its residentsI wonder where they came up with that. Find me one thing they have done to show this.
The plans had the project situated on 17 acres of a 60-acre tract of land in order to preserve 43 acres of natural beauty, and to ensure the integrity of, and compatibility with, the surrounding area.They make it sound so rosy and pink. The reason why they were planning to situate the property on the 17 acres, is because the rest of the property is wetlands and cannot be impacted without mitigating land. I love how they say it's to "preserve 43 acres of natural beauty," when thy planned on building a big condo building (neither natural nor beautiful in any way), over-looking an RV campground. Sounds like some lofty marketing scheme going on.
"What is most troubling," Weaver added, "is that Walton County's action in denying the project based on an un-adopted, subjective height standard is directly contrary to the Circuit Court's previous clear instructions to Walton County in the 2001 Inlet Beach Capital case.?
Where the heck did they come up with this statement? The County rejected the project based on things other than building height, such as non-compatibility. The parcel is zoned as rural, yet the applicants' "experts" testified that this property was not really rural, and that it was in actuality, urban. Talk about a stretch. The actual project, as submitted, was more urban, though with the RV, had a rural and commercial aspect, though the property, as mentioned, is zoned rural.
Beach Fanatic
That depends. Are you wondering how you can get neighbors' thoughts, or the County's. Also, when you say "prior to submitting for the DO," do you mean to the Planning Dept, Planning Commission, or the BCC?Should be all three. The problem, IMO, is that citizens do not understand the esthetic value and the need for properly controlled growth and development. From all I have heard at BCC meetings, its a no brainer. Jolly Bay LLC is wrong and not acting in the interest of the neighborhood and citizens of Walton County. That being said, does anyone have utter faith in our judicial system? No one knows how the court will react. Does anyone believe that judges will someday go back to throwing frivilous lawsuits out of their courts? I can guarantee one thing out of this case and its a positive. The lawyers and their firms will make a ton of money. Unfortunately, it is yours and mine as taxpayers. While I am at it, does anyone think a lawyer will ever tell someone your case is not viable. As long as the money is right, I doubt it. Obviously, I have little use for most of our barristers. I rank most of them right below used car salesman at a shady used car lot.
Beach Fanatic
I wonder where they came up with that. Find me one thing they have done to show this.Exactly!!!!
I'm not sure these 'developers' have done anything else. Back in the boom, any landowner could dub themself a developer.
They make it sound so rosy and pink. The reason why they were planning to situate the property on the 17 acres, is because the rest of the property is wetlands and cannot be impacted without mitigating land. I love how they say it's to "preserve 43 acres of natural beauty," when thy planned on building a big condo building (neither natural nor beautiful in any way), over-looking an RV campground. Sounds like some lofty marketing scheme going on.
SWGBAuthor
Anybody look up the LLC on sunbiz.org?
MY understanding is that they had approval up to the BCC hearing based on the fact that the designs met code. Once the hearing in front of the BCC occurs it is open to the public and the BCC is making it's final decision based on public input. In this case the public didn't want it so it was denied.
MY understanding is that they had approval up to the BCC hearing based on the fact that the designs met code. Once the hearing in front of the BCC occurs it is open to the public and the BCC is making it's final decision based on public input. In this case the public didn't want it so it was denied.
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.