Saturday, September 13, 2008

WHITEHURST: THE SAGA - Part I

Another Coppen-based Lawsuit

It’s entirely possible that former City Commissioner Jose Coppen has info about the Whitehurst lawsuit that the rest of us aren’t privy to. After all, he was its chief instigator and has continued to "bird dog" it long after his term ended. But, to even intimate for one moment that a judicial decision is imminent here is to ignore that the online court docket shows no pending motions. The matter has not, as yet, even been set for trial. Legal fees continue to tax an already anemic city bottom line with over $30,000 incurred so far.

Explaining the complexities of this land dispute involving the true location of IRB’s southern boundary is no easy task. Truthfully, it’s an eye-crosser…but here goes anyway.

Parker & Rosemary Willis own the first 50’ lot in Indian Shores just to the south of the Whitehurst Beach Access. Willis also holds title to an adjoining 7.3’ to the north of his lot—that 7.3’ is the crux of the lawsuit. For decades, Willis has paid (and still pays) taxes to the Town of Indian Shores on the entire 57.3’ to which he had title. How did Willis get his title to the 7.3’ strip? The Town of Indian Shores sold it to Willis predecessor in title in 1985 for $20,000 as part of Indian Shores “half” of the 60’ right-of-way. Money changed hands. A deed was recorded. IRB did not object to the sale. A year later in 1986, Willis purchased both the 50’ lot AND the 7.3’ and has lived on the land ever since with nary a cautionary word by Indian Rocks Beach or Indian Shores.

Roll the clock forward. A commissioner’s own personal view is threatened and IRB claims ownership of the entire 60’ ROW…asserting that Indian Shores had no right to sell the 7.3’ portion of “their half” in the first place…because it wasn’t theirs to sell.

So, why the hell didn’t someone speak up 20 years ago instead of watching an adjacent town sell what we believed to be ours? Instead, IRB did what IRB always does—sit back and wait until innocent people get caught up by their mistakes. IRB was fully aware of the sale of the 7.3’ at the time—watched while money changed hands and a deed was recorded and SAID NOTHING—DID NOTHING—and took no issue with the transaction. Now IRB claims the 7.3’ is ours…and always was. How a court will decide this matter is anyone’s guess. There are definitely two sides.

Some evidence to consider:

1. A City of IRB document referencing a “boundary agreement with Indian Shores” which no one at City Hall can seem to locate—go figure.

2. A memo from a former IRB City Manager acknowledging the center line of Whitehurst as the recognized boundary between the two towns.

3. Police reports through the years showing Indian Shores’ police responding to calls on the south half; Indian Rocks Beach police handled calls on the north half.

4. Nearly every IRB map, even the City maps, shows the dividing line between IRB and Indian Shores in the center of Whitehurst—not the southern edge as IRB now claims.

5. The seawall, rebuilt after Elena, does not include all the land IRB now claims it owns.

6. The most recent charter review mentions a problem with our town’s southern boundary which was referred back to the DiNicola commission—the problem, once again, was totally ignored (until former Commission Coppen raised a stink!).

7. Even the “inventory” of our public lands in our comprehensive plan lists only 30’ of Whitehurst as being ours—yet the City claims ownership of the entire 60’.

Something a little less significant, but noticeable nonetheless, is the location of the IRB City Limits sign when driving south on Gulf Boulevard. “Welcome to Indian Rocks Beach” is placed dead center of the beach access—NOT where IRB claims the property line to be.

If IRB’s ownership of the entire 60’ of beach access is and was so clear, why wasn’t this beach access beautified like all the others? More on this subject (my favorite according to Jose!) later…so stay tuned.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Jose = big mouth + little brain