Wasn't life good enough in Key West, Florida a decade ago? Things seemed more laid back. I remember all of my friends rented or owned houses with pools. Today, you are lucky if they have a yard. And we all had the time, especially in the summer, to relax even more. There were plenty of boats to go around amongst us, and nearly every day there would be someone who said "Jump onboard, let's go to Marvin Key!". Today, it is a rare opportunity when you get to go out on the water for fun.
But suffice it to say, when you invite a bunch of sharks to a party, don't be surprised when they eat everything...Including you.
In my opinion, Truman Annex's leadership have brought island politics to a new low (not an easy thing to do on our quacky island), and in doing so alienated themselves from the rest of the island of Key West.
For reasons that make no sense to me, the leaders of Truman Annex are going to hit the city of Key West into what promises to be a very expensive lawsuit. All of it, over a road that runs from Old Town, through Truman Annex, to the new waterfront property give to the City of Key West from the Navy, right through the Truman Annex development. It depresses me that Key West has such a community. Are they unable to live on the island with a communal spirit? It is no surprise that most Truman Annex residents live in a strange duality (embracing our island with a bear hug...crushing it to death)....most of them don't live here for most of the year.
Key West City Commissioner Lopez is right: every time that the city of Key West has attempted to negotiate with the Navy for the land, the residents of Truman Annex have threatened lawsuits.
Like this post? Let us know:
17 comments:
Wow, sounds like KW is a case study for the rise and fall of real estate and how communities adapt (or dont!).
I keep saying I'm going to retire there and do some freelance urban planning consulting when I'm 65, but time will tell if I can afford it!
the issue of southard streeet is rather property rights and the sanctity of contracts. this nonsense of the residents not wanting to be part of the island is "scat". the street is private property. if taken via eminent domain damages are based on market value of the property.
the value of the property is not just the street but the ungateing of a gated community. in several well done studies the value of gates in a community increases the property value by 6-9%. if the city ungates the community the loss will be 6-9% of market value of the homes affected. the consevative market value of all the homes in tampoa comes to more than 400 million dollars. that is were this figure of 35-40 million dollars in compensitory damages from an eminent domain takeover comes from.
the grandstanding by the city is unbelievable. how you or anyone can rationalize the signing of a binding contract (in 2000) written by the city and its lawyers and passed unanimously by the city commission only to renege on it after the city gets the land it wants is beyond belief.
Veggiegator - Key West economics should be studied formally by students interested in the dynamics (and peril) of restricted markets. Don't give up on your dream though. Plus, Key West could use talented urban planners.
Anonymous - here is the real deal with the Southard Street/TAMPOA dispute: the contract that you are waiving in the air was signed under duress (you threatening them with lawsuits) and was made with a city commission that months later was voted out of office. You may have made an agreement with the City Commission - but it is clearly against the will of the general population of Key West. The citizens of Key West don't want you to close the gates on a part of the island that has been free and open for over 100 years. So the City of Key West should do what the citizens want - take control of Southard Street back, whatever the cost. You keep throwing around huge dollars, thinking it will scare off the city. I'm encouraging the city to think big - and fight this thing aggressively. Either that or buy up the Truman Annex properties, one by one, until you have a majority, turn it into affordable housing, and out-vote the gate-lovers.
Oh, and by the way - I'm not so sure it is correct to think that a gated community is worth more than a non-gated community.
And thank you for posting your comments - they are welcome and I encourage you to continue.
I'll share this with my professors who work with housing issues and see what they think. Maybe someone can make a thesis out of it!
I did a report on Gated Communities about a year ago and there is a psychological reason for them to bring up market value, but they really don't reduce crime. Especially not certain types of crime. I've rented a condo at Truman Annex and it doesnt take any special pass to get past the gaurd at the gate. Sorry to publicly announce that here, anonymous, but your gate isn't really protecting you from anything. I even went through there when I wasn't renting a place, just to show a friend of mine what it looked like. We didnt have any trouble getting in then, either. Theres no one gaurding the pedestrian access either. Whats going to stop someone from robbing a place? Gates are not that special. Now maybe over at the Navy base or JIATFE, yeah, that gate will keep unauthorized people out. Otherwise, fancy neighborhood gates do nothing but re-segregate a town (or an island, in this case).
all negotiations are made under some duress. right now the city in their negotiation is threatening eminent domain. this issue of duress is bogus. a contract signed by all parties needs to be followed. one can not function in a society where a contract is just discarded whenever one side feels as though they don't like it.
the other issue is that southard st. under the navy was not open and was not "free". it was us navy property that was sold now and in the possession of tampoa legally.
the city had a chance to obtain this property without cost but they did not.
you are also very willing to spend any amount of my tax dollars without asking me. there has been no referendum on this, only political grandstanding, lies, and bad faith negotiations by the city.
in response to veggiegator. this question of why gated communities exist is not the issue. they exist for many reasons and are legal. the fact is that a gated community enhanses the property value by 6-9% documented by at least two recent academic well done comparitive studies. in fact a home owners association enhanses the property value over a community without one too.
veggiegator - always a pleasure to see you drop by. I agree with you completely that gated communities reinstate segregation. And what a dramatic example: Truman Annex (nearly all-white, wealthy, and most part-time to Key West) versus Bahama Village (nearly all-black, low inclome, and full time residents).
anonymous - using eminent domain may not cost as much as you are warning. Why? Couple reasons. One, the property being taken is still a street and not someones home being turned into an industrial park. Secondly, there are many gates in Truman Annex: Front Street, Fleming Street, Green Street. The city is not asking to remove those (although I with they would). So, at worst, your gated community will become a partially gated community (not an ungated community). This should then not cost as much as you suggest. Maybe less than half, since Truman Annex would be losing only one of many gates. Plus, why would a judge give you that much money for a street that the public was using anyway?
But if you are going to claim that making Southard Street an open street will cause Truman Annex to become an "ungated community", than let's rip out the rest of the fences and have the City of Key West get its money's worth.
As for public opinion and spending "your" tax dollars - Truman Annex is probably under 500 residents. The rest of the island of Key West is another 28,000. You are far outnumbered, and the general population hates TAMPOA's behavior.
by the definition of a gated community in the studies one is entirely gated or not gated. there is not partially gated community. and sure if you want to ungate all the gates have at it but the costs will be significant. these costs are the value of ungating this community and need to be paid under eminent domain rules.
laws are laws. the majority can not run roughshod over the minority. that occurred in germany and you see the results. the courts will rule and the rule of law will hopefully be followed.
just for the record, the agreement was made in 2000 and the dramatic change in the commission was made in 2005. that's 5 years later, not months. more accuracy rather than hyperbole is needed.
also just for acuracy your contention of 28000 vs 500 is typical hyperbole non sense again. where is the referendum, where are your references? the election was not a referendum on the waterfront and in fact that issue was not major on anyone's agenda other than lopez'. all you speak from is the press and if you read the key west press it is far from objective and extremely bias for its own position.
be prepared, the courts will decide this contract issue and eminent domain on the basis of law. the city of hollywood florida just found this out to it to its regret.
anonymous - actually, as far as I'm concerned, TAMPA never had a valid agreement with the City of Key West. It was all still being negotiated. Much of what the former commission did was objectionable by the majority (informal poll - you ever hear of the coconut telegraph? it's still alive and well, though apparently no longer wired into Truman Annex) of Key West and that is why they were eventually voted out...including the Mayor.
as for gated, partially gated, and non-gated communities, maybe you are right, there is only gated and non-gated. So I encourage the City of Key West, if it is to use eminent domain, to get it's money's worth and rip out all of the gates, and take back all of the Truman Annex streets. According to your logic, this would cost the same as the taking of Southard. So why not open this neighborhood up? I have a feeling Truman Annex residents might view losing four gates as worse than one gate.
again you base most of what you say on your own bias without much in concrete substantiation. but i do agree with you to let the city try to take all the gates. an ungated commmunity is an ungated community be it one gate lost or four. the cost will be in the range of 35-40 million and that's based on published studies not just someone's gut feeling or vague rationalizations.
whether you agree that there was a valid agreement or not is not the issue, the courts will decide. if you think a bit and research the records you will find that the courts were involved intimately in the initial agreement and in fact sanctioned it along with the state of florida, and the navy as well as all the elected representatives of key west in 2000. for them to now invalidate that agreement would set precedent that no agreement entered into with a municipal government can be relied on. any agreement you would make with a city or state wouldn't be worth the paper it was printed on. wouldn't that be a hell of a precedent for a local judge to make!
by the way you never do answer those points of fact such as southard street was owned by the us navy for probably 60- 80 years and was not "free" or open to the citizens of key west over the last 100 years. i think that was your rationalization for why a taking would involve only minimal expense.
i wouldn't be surprised if tampoa doesn't ask the navy to take back the land it gave to the city since the city obtained it under a false promise of an agreement with tampoa which the navy agreed to as a condition in granting the city the 33 acres of ground it now has.
This is a blog - a personal opinion and not the judicial system.
When I write that Southard Street used to be on open thoroughfare, I refer to the history of the island. As you admit, before the Navy, this was a regular old Key West street. Check the map of 1895.
One thing that I think anonymous is overlooking: you are in South Florida. Don't count on anything to bail you out. Things have a strange way of ending up in the courts. And politicians can be more ornery than an Everglades aligator.
Good luck in court. Reminds me of what someone said to Johnny Cochran: "Good luck lawyering your way out of hell".
Better get that court decision soon - Key West condo values are about to implode.
the map of 1884 has southard st stopping at emma. but this is not 1884 or 1895 or 1492. the navy owned this property for more that 5 decades and they sold it away. i agree that the city should have bought it had they felt that it was so important but the commissioners didn't. too bad.
with your logic why don't we (europeans, asian, etc.) give back all the land we took from the native people. that ain't reality it ain't going to happen but if you like your fantasy have at it.
by the way back in 1884 the marine hospital (part of the annex) was not in the city of key west and the city did not extent to include the whole island.
by the way it is clear that you are trying to incite racist and class unrest by your comments in response to one of my messages. anyone can live in the annex by buying property or renting (black, white etc). some of the most expensive houses on this island are not in the annex. your attempt at bringing up race and class is mean spirited and inherently destructive and just the type of propaganda used in the 1940's. was it an oversight the you didn't include religion?
I had to delete a comment because it listed someone's phone number. Please, do not list phone numbers.
The letter from the Truman Annex was a little harsh in my opinion, but it sure looks like the city is jerking them around. All the Truman Annex folks wanted -- from what I can piece together out of the Citizen -- was that traffic in and out of the Navy property be shared. At one point Bahama Village was begging to have the entrance go through that neighborhood, but then changed their mind and thought it would be too disruptive for their narrow streets. Fair enough, but now they want to put all the traffic down Southard Street. Keep in mind that the early plans call for 400+ parking spaces at the Navy property and you can see why they'd be concerned. Incidentally, I might be anonymous but I have no personal or financial interest in this matter one way another.
Following the rationale offered on this blog, I guess the city can take back the properties at the corner of Southard and Thomas where Pena's House of Rose's used to be, too. After all, the Navy has only had it since World War II.
I agree that TAMPOA's letter was harsh. If I had a say in this, I would suggest that several streets remain open to take people in and out of the new park. But it's also clear that TAMPOA and the city had a deal on this matter. To say the City Commission signed it under duress is ridiculous, as is the assertion that it was signed just before an election so the agreement is invalid.
In my opinion, Commissioner Lopez is as loose a cannon as some of the hardcore TAMPOA representatives. It's a recipe for trouble.
Post a Comment