section 16-77 shown above.

are city officials having trouble defining what is the meaning of a commercial billboard ?

here's some help !

language in Code Sec. 16-77

        This is the only use for the five (5) off-premises signs currently existing in the incorporated areas of the City.  The Ordinance No. 2001-50 became effective Oct. 22, 2001.   There is no other use permitted for those locations.    No where in the Ordinance is it implied these  billboards can be converted from commercial to "political" usage.

        The above terms and language are taken, and compiled directly from several versions of the Webster's New World Dictionary, Webster's Universal College Dictionary, The International Webster's Dictionary, and checked for the legality of the usage of descriptions, and words with two versions of Stephen H. Gifis Law Dictionaries.

        This language as noted in the "actual" code itself is, in other words, written in plain English, inserted into the new "Charter Revision" by City counsel, and passed as law by the current City Commission.   Now, is there any phrase, word, use of language, and reference in Sec. 16-77 of the City of Winter Springs Code that the City's legal counsel, and management doesn't understand?

        After all, the taxpayers of the City of Winter Springs have paid the Law Firm of Brown, Ward, Salzman, & Weiss, P.A. close to $300,000 for the year of 2002.   That doesn't even account for all the outside legal assistance as sought by the City Manager.   The citizens of Winter Springs thought they had purchased the services of an attorney -- not the law firms presently absorbing our tax dollars.

        It would have been prudent, at the time of ratifying the new Charter, that legal counsel would have studied the language used on the code insertions.   As it is now, legal counsel says that 16-80 needs to be re-written.  Haven't the citizens of Winter Springs already paid for services rendered on the codes before the passage of the law by the Commission?

        Maybe this is why the budget of Winter Springs is uncontrollable -- too much duplication, and the lack of intelligence by management to recognized such.   Isn't  it obvious that poor City management has caused extensive legal coverage--- the highest in the history of the City?    Isn't it also true the City Commission has placed tremendous legal strain upon the City through lack of knowledge by their "micro-managing" idiosyncrasies?    Their DRC "power-ploys" have left legal ramifications.

            After all, the City lost its legal liability insurance by the League of Cities, due to huge legal losses and settlements resulting from law suits.   This brings up an interesting question.   The legal fees of this City are the highest in the City's history.    Citizens aren't the cause of these massive fees.   Is it City management and City Government?

        Of the almost $300,000 dollars paid to the one law firm --- what was recovered, other than the $50.00 dog nuisance fine    I understand is now in the appellate court system?    That doesn't include the fees other law firms involved in the multi-million dollars issued on bonds, environmental legal experts, the law suits by other governmental agencies, and code issues of obviously poorly written codes.

            The citizens are not getting their money's worth, by the legal representation of law firms, when the job is only half done --- such as in the code situation.   Are most of the legal fees being paid to cover the "micro-managing" of the City Commission on land usage,  etc., which most certainly contain potential law suit possibilities?    Is the City Manager, in his annexation thirst, subjecting the City to MORE potential law suits yet to be filed.   The current lawsuits are still pending.

is the billboard protection issue another needed commission vote ?

shouldn't the city be honest ?

why are they protecting these violations ?

email your concerns to --

rmclemore@winterspringsfl.org

section 16-80 shown above.

          The 16-80 section is not written properly, so the City Attorney has to re-write the section.    The Commission, on Sept. 23rd, tried to waive "political sign fees", but got caught in a huge charter blunder.    With all the money spent for legal, and consultant fees, by City Manager McLemore, for the "new" charter ------  they still couldn't get it right.   

       Then shear ignorance of the facts places the subject on a Commission meeting agenda.    What this City needs is someone in responsible positions to prevent fiascos such as that code agenda item blunder.   No wonder meetings take all night.

 there are no political sign fees !

          Over the past few years, even with the new stringent codes regulating signs within the City, many examples have been sent to the City for enforcement of these violations.    All have fallen upon either pure blind, or deaf individuals who are responsible for upholding the Laws of the City.

look at the violations !

!

a truck with signs in tuscawilla.

the homeowner's hierarchy didn't care !

not only signs, but commercial trash.

Moti Khemlani's friends.

down the street from city hall.

city manager saw this mess everyday.

in the million dollar SR434 visioning area.

oh no - not on hallowed towncenter property.

laying on the ground in the easement.

city litter for over a month !

a public easement commissioner.

say it isn't so ---

not "Ban-Trailer-Signs" commissioner Gennell

email your concerns to --

cindy4mayor@aol.com