B) The Bible states "love your neighbor as
you love yourself." So, if a man or
woman does not love himself or herself, of course they would not love their
fellow human being such as myself also.
And this is the case before us today.
I was not respected, I was not protected, and the billows of injustice
balefully floated and raged over my head.
But with the words of the late, Rev, Dr.
Martin Luther king, I am able to
face them headlong, so long as I know "
The arc of the moral Universe is long but, it bends toward
Justice." I decry such injustices
in High Places and I state a claim on VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS that was according
to the letter sent to me on November 2003, DO YOU KNOW THE CONTENTS OF THE
LETTER? the EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL LETTER
which stated that Mrs. Pat Blackshear from the Walton County denied my existing
Vested Property Rights and made her own unconstitutional determination that I had Vested Property
Rights (VPR)
That was an
outcry. Since you have never been to LAW
SCHOOL LIKE I HAVE NEVER COMPLETED LAW of which I invested only one year of my
time. Therefore, I decided to invest
time to understand my own case and I have under my belt, nearly TEN YEARS AND
30,000 HOURS OF PERSONAL PROBE, INVESTIGATION AND RESEARCH. Enough TO RESIST THE ONLSLAUGHT OF EVIL
AGAINST ME SINCE 2007 WHEN THE FEDERAL JUDGES CONFESSED THAT THEY HAD A)
COMMITED OVERSIGHT, WHERE WERE YOU? B)
WHEN THEY ADMITTED TO OBSTRUCTION WHERE WERE YOU? C) WHEN THEY DENIED MY PROPERTY RIGHTS, WHERE
WERE YOU? D) WHEN THEY DENIED ME JURY
TRIAL RIGHTS BY LAW AND ACCORDING TO THE CIVIL RIGHTS LEGISLATURE OF 1991,
WHERE WERE YOU? THE DAY IS COMING THAT
ALL WILL BE REVEALED AND EVEN IF SOMEONE WOULD BE CLEVER ENOUGH TO DEFY THE
WORLD, THEY CANNOT BE CLEVER ENOUGH FOR GOD. FOR, HE SEES EVERYTHING WE DO IN
THE DARK AND HE WILL SEE TO IT THAT VENGEANCE IS MET ACCORDINGLY. YOU WERE MISSING IN ACTIONS AND FOR GOOD
CAUSE FOR YOU ARE NOT A MATERIAL WITNESS IN THIS CASE. DO NOT OPEN YOUR MOUTH AT ALL. STAY QUIET
AND SWALLOW TRUTHS AND IF YOU ARE HUMBLE
LIKE ME YOU WILL TAKE MORE TRUTHS NOT LESS.
I WOULD NOT NEED TO WRITE THESE POSTS FOLKS, IF THE GUILTY PARTIES WERE
HUMBLE ENOUGH TO ACCEPT THAT FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE history OF THE WORLD A
BLACK MAN HAS STOOD AND DECLARED THE 100% TRUTH WITH OFFER OF PROOF BEFORE A
COURT AND THERE IS NOTHING DISRESPECTFUL ABOUT THAT. FOR, BASED ON MY POSTS, I NEVER DISRESPECTED
THE AUTHORITIES, DESPITE WHAT I FOUND. MY
LAWSUIT WAS AND IS BASED ON THE CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION
WHICH WAS TOO MUCH FOR ME TO PASS FOR IT AFFECT ALL TAX PAYERS AND ALL
CITIZENS. AND HERE IS THE CITATION FROM
THE WEBSITE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE "
Title VI—Nondiscrimination in Federally
Assisted Programs
Authorized but
did not require withdrawal of federal funds from programs which practiced
discrimination. I WILL NOT ADD ONE WORD SO YOU MAY UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON
HERE. This act, signed into law by
President Lyndon Johnson on July 2, 1964, prohibited discrimination in public
places, provided for the integration of schools and other public facilities,
and made employment discrimination illegal. This document was the most sweeping
civil rights legislation since Reconstruction.
REMEMBER THAT THE FED JUSDGES TOLD ME THAT "THE ROYS OWN PROPERTY
IN AN AREA THAT HISTORICALLY HAS BEEN RACIALLY SEGREGATED" MEANING THAT
THE STATE OF FLORIDA IS HISTORICALLY RACIALLY SEGREGATED. AS SUCH, YOUR TAX MONEY AND MY TAX MONEY ARE
GOING TO THAT STATE AND IT IS NOW TIME FOR THE STATE TO CLEAN UP ITS ACT AND BE
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND THE UNITED NATIONS
RESOLUTIONS. AND, IT IS NOT TOO LATE.
In an 11 June 1963 speech broadcast live on
national television and radio, President John F. Kennedy unveiled plans to
pursue a comprehensive civil rights bill in Congress, stating, ‘‘this nation,
for all its hopes and all its boasts, will not be fully free until all its
citizens are free’’ (‘‘President Kennedy’s Radio-TV Address,’’ 970). King
congratulated Kennedy on his speech, calling it ‘‘one of the most eloquent,
profound and unequivocal pleas for justice and the freedom of all men ever made
by any president’’ (King, 12 June 1963).
tHIS SOUNDS LIKE A SPEECH BY PRESIDENT OBAMA. The earlier Civil Rights Act of 1957, the
first law addressing the legal rights of African Americans passed by Congress
since Reconstruction, had established the Civil Rights division of the Justice
Department and the U.S. Civil Rights Commission to investigate claims of racial
discrimination. Before the 1957 bill was passed Congress had, however, removed
a provision that would have empowered the Justice Department to enforce the
Brown v. Board of Education decision. A. Philip Randolph and other civil rights
leaders continued to press the major political parties and presidents Dwight D.
Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy to enact such legislation and to outlaw
segregation. The civil rights legislation that Kennedy introduced to Congress
on 19 June 1963 addressed these issues, and King advocated for its passage.
In an article published after the 1963 March
on Washington for Jobs and Freedom that posed the question, ‘‘What next?’’ King
wrote, ‘‘The hundreds of thousands who marched in Washington marched to level
barriers. They summed up everything in a word—NOW. What is the content of NOW?
Everything, not some things, in the President’s civil rights bill is part of
NOW’’ (King, ‘‘In a Word—Now’’).
Following
Kennedy’s assassination in November 1963, King continued to press for the bill
as did newly inaugurated President Lyndon B. Johnson. In his 4 January 1964
column in the New York Amsterdam News, King maintained that the legislation was
‘‘the order of the day at the great March on Washington last summer. The Negro
and his compatriots for self-respect and human dignity will not be denied’’
(King, ‘‘A Look to 1964’’).
The bill passed
the House of Representatives in mid-February 1964, but became mired in the
Senate due to a filibuster by southern senators that lasted 75 days. When the
bill finally passed the Senate, King hailed it as one that would ‘‘bring
practical relief to the Negro in the South, and will give the Negro in the
North a psychological boost that he sorely needs’’ (King, 19 June 1964). On 2
July 1964, Johnson signed the new Civil Rights Act of 1964 into law with King
and other civil rights leaders present. The law’s provisions created the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission to address race and sex discrimination in
employment and a Community Relations Service to help local communities solve
racial disputes; authorized federal intervention to ensure the desegregation of
schools, parks, swimming pools, and other public facilities; and restricted the
use of literacy tests as a requirement for voter registration.WHICH MAKES ALL
THE DEFENDANTS GUILTY WITHOUT ANY POSSIBLE LFTING UP OF THEIR HEADS AGAINST
ME. DO YOU KNOW THE NEW ADDRESS FOR THE
FIRST ATTORNEY THAT SHOOK ME UP WITH INJUSTICE ON OR AROUND September 22,
2005? AND, I AM BLOWING THE WHISTLES ON
SUCH AND OTHERS AS WELL. THE AUTHORITIES
CHARGE MUST TAKE THE STEPS TO ESTABLISH THE FACT AND DEMANDS CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
AFTER THE FACTS ARE CLEAR TO THEM LIKE THEY ARE TO ME.
Here is the law FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA
below Title VI:
CIVIL PRACTICE
AND PROCEDURE
Chapter 70
RELIEF FROM
BURDENS ON REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
70.001 Private
property rights protection.—
(1) This act may
be cited as the “Bert J. Harris, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act.”
The Legislature recognizes that some laws, regulations, and ordinances of the
state and political entities in the state, as applied, may inordinately burden,
restrict, or limit private property rights without amounting to a taking under
the State Constitution or the United States Constitution. The Legislature
determines (Added not the County) that there is an important state interest in
protecting the interests of private property owners from such inordinate
burdens. Therefore, it is the intent of the Legislature that, as a separate and
distinct cause of action from the law of takings, the Legislature herein
provides for relief, or payment of compensation, when a new law, rule,
regulation, or ordinance of the state or a political entity in the state, as
applied, unfairly affects real property. (Of Course it was newly added after
the investigations of Pat Blackshear as stated on the November 2005 Equitable
Estoppel Letter.
(2) When a
specific action of a governmental entity has inordinately burdened an existing
use of real property or a vested right to a specific use of real property, the
property owner of that real property is entitled to relief, which may include
compensation for the actual loss to the fair market value of the real property
caused by the action of government, as provided in this section.
(3) For purposes
of this section:
(a) The
existence of a “vested right” is to be determined by applying the principles of
equitable estoppel or substantive due process under the common law or by
applying the statutory law of this state.
(b) The term
“existing use” means:
1. An actual,
present use or activity on the real property, including periods of inactivity
which are normally associated with, or are incidental to, the nature or type of
use; or
2. Activity or
such reasonably foreseeable, nonspeculative land uses which are suitable for
the subject real property and compatible with adjacent land uses and which have
created an existing fair market value in the property greater than the fair
market value of the actual, present use or activity on the real property.
(c) The term
“governmental entity” includes an agency of the state, a regional or a local government
created by the State Constitution or by general or special act, any county or
municipality, or any other entity that independently exercises governmental
authority. The term does not include the United States or any of its agencies,
or an agency of the state, a regional or a local government created by the
State Constitution or by general or special act, any county or municipality, or
any other entity that independently exercises governmental authority, when
exercising the powers of the United States or any of its agencies through a
formal delegation of federal authority.
(d) The term
“action of a governmental entity” means a specific action of a governmental
entity which affects real property, including action on an application or
permit.
(e) The terms
“inordinate burden” and “inordinately burdened”:
1. Mean that an
action of one or more governmental entities has directly restricted or limited
the use of real property such that the property owner is permanently unable to
attain the reasonable, investment-backed expectation for the existing use of
the real property or a vested right to a specific use of the real property with
respect to the real property as a whole, or that the property owner is left
with existing or vested uses that are unreasonable such that the property owner
bears permanently a disproportionate share of a burden imposed for the good of
the public, which in fairness should be borne by the public at large.
2. Do not
include temporary impacts to real property; impacts to real property occasioned
by governmental abatement, prohibition, prevention, or remediation of a public
nuisance at common law or a noxious use of private property; or impacts to real
property caused by an action of a governmental entity taken to grant relief to a
property owner under this section. However, a temporary impact on development,
as defined in s. 380.04, that is in effect for longer than 1 year may,
depending upon the circumstances, constitute an “inordinate burden” as provided
in this paragraph.
In determining
whether reasonable, investment-backed expectations are inordinately burdened,
consideration may be given to the factual circumstances leading to the time
elapsed between enactment of the law or regulation and its first application to
the subject property.
(f) The term
“property owner” means the person who holds legal title to the real property at
issue. The term does not include a governmental entity.
(g) The term
“real property” means land and includes any appurtenances and improvements to
the land, including any other relevant real property in which the property
owner had a relevant interest.
(4)(a) Not less
than 150 days prior to filing an action under this section against a
governmental entity, a property owner who seeks compensation under this section
must present the claim in writing to the head of the governmental entity,
except that if the property is classified as agricultural pursuant to s.
193.461, the notice period is 90 days. The property owner must submit, along
with the claim, a bona fide, valid appraisal that supports the claim and
demonstrates the loss in fair market value to the real property. If the action
of government is the culmination of a process that involves more than one
governmental entity, or if a complete resolution of all relevant issues, in the
view of the property owner or in the view of a governmental entity to whom a
claim is presented, requires the active participation of more than one
governmental entity, the property owner shall present the claim as provided in
this section to each of the governmental entities.
(b) The
governmental entity shall provide written notice of the claim to all parties to
any administrative action that gave rise to the claim, and to owners of real
property contiguous to the owner’s property at the addresses listed on the most
recent county tax rolls. Within 15 days after the claim being presented, the
governmental entity shall report the claim in writing to the Department of
Legal Affairs, and shall provide the department with the name, address, and
telephone number of the employee of the governmental entity from whom
additional information may be obtained about the claim during the pendency of
the claim and any subsequent judicial action.
(c) During the
90-day-notice period or the 150-day-notice period, unless extended by agreement
of the parties, the governmental entity shall make a written settlement offer
to effectuate:
1. An adjustment
of land development or permit standards or other provisions controlling the
development or use of land.
2. Increases or
modifications in the density, intensity, or use of areas of development.
3. The transfer
of developmental rights.
4. Land swaps or
exchanges.
5. Mitigation,
including payments in lieu of onsite mitigation.
6. Location on
the least sensitive portion of the property.
7. Conditioning
the amount of development or use permitted.
8. A requirement
that issues be addressed on a more comprehensive basis than a single proposed
use or development.
9. Issuance of
the development order, a variance, special exception, or other extraordinary
relief.
10. Purchase of
the real property, or an interest therein, by an appropriate governmental
entity or payment of compensation.
11. No changes
to the action of the governmental entity.
If the property
owner accepts the settlement offer, the governmental entity may implement the
settlement offer by appropriate development agreement; by issuing a variance,
special exception, or other extraordinary relief; or by other appropriate
method, subject to paragraph (d).
(d)1. Whenever a
governmental entity enters into a settlement agreement under this section which
would have the effect of a modification, variance, or a special exception to
the application of a rule, regulation, or ordinance as it would otherwise apply
to the subject real property, the relief granted shall protect the public
interest served by the regulations at issue and be the appropriate relief
necessary to prevent the governmental regulatory effort from inordinately
burdening the real property.
2. Whenever a
governmental entity enters into a settlement agreement under this section which
would have the effect of contravening the application of a statute as it would
otherwise apply to the subject real property, the governmental entity and the
property owner shall jointly file an action in the circuit court where the real
property is located for approval of the settlement agreement by the court to
ensure that the relief granted protects the public interest served by the
statute at issue and is the appropriate relief necessary to prevent the
governmental regulatory effort from inordinately burdening the real property.
(5)(a) During
the 90-day-notice period or the 150-day-notice period, unless a settlement
offer is accepted by the property owner, each of the governmental entities
provided notice pursuant to paragraph (4)(a) shall issue a written statement of
allowable uses identifying the allowable uses to which the subject property may
be put. The failure of the governmental entity to issue a statement of
allowable uses during the applicable 90-day-notice period or 150-day-notice
period shall be deemed a denial for purposes of allowing a property owner to
file an action in the circuit court under this section. If a written statement
of allowable uses is issued, it constitutes the last prerequisite to judicial
review for the purposes of the judicial proceeding created by this section,
notwithstanding the availability of other administrative remedies.
(b) If the
property owner rejects the settlement offer and the statement of allowable uses
of the governmental entity or entities, the property owner may file a claim for
compensation in the circuit court, a copy of which shall be served
contemporaneously on the head of each of the governmental entities that made a
settlement offer and a statement of allowable uses that was rejected by the
property owner. Actions under this section shall be brought only in the county
where the real property is located.
(6)(a) The
circuit court shall determine whether an existing use of the real property or a
vested right to a specific use of the real property existed and, if so,
whether, considering the settlement offer and statement of allowable uses, the
governmental entity or entities have inordinately burdened the real property.
If the actions of more than one governmental entity, considering any settlement
offers and statement of allowable uses, are responsible for the action that
imposed the inordinate burden on the real property of the property owner, the
court shall determine the percentage of responsibility each such governmental
entity bears with respect to the inordinate burden. A governmental entity may
take an interlocutory appeal of the court’s determination that the action of
the governmental entity has resulted in an inordinate burden. An interlocutory
appeal does not automatically stay the proceedings; however, the court may stay
the proceedings during the pendency of the interlocutory appeal. If the
governmental entity does not prevail in the interlocutory appeal, the court
shall award to the prevailing property owner the costs and a reasonable
attorney fee incurred by the property owner in the interlocutory appeal.
(b) Following
its determination of the percentage of responsibility of each governmental
entity, and following the resolution of any interlocutory appeal, the court
shall impanel a jury to determine the total amount of compensation to the
property owner for the loss in value due to the inordinate burden to the real
property. The award of compensation shall be determined by calculating the
difference in the fair market value of the real property, as it existed at the
time of the governmental action at issue, as though the owner had the ability
to attain the reasonable investment-backed expectation or was not left with
uses that are unreasonable, whichever the case may be, and the fair market
value of the real property, as it existed at the time of the governmental
action at issue, as inordinately burdened, considering the settlement offer
together with the statement of allowable uses, of the governmental entity or
entities. In determining the award of compensation, consideration may not be
given to business damages relative to any development, activity, or use that
the action of the governmental entity or entities, considering the settlement
offer together with the statement of allowable uses has restricted, limited, or
prohibited. The award of compensation shall include a reasonable award of
prejudgment interest from the date the claim was presented to the governmental
entity or entities as provided in subsection (4).
(c)1. In any
action filed pursuant to this section, the property owner is entitled to
recover reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred by the property owner, from
the governmental entity or entities, according to their proportionate share as
determined by the court, from the date of the filing of the circuit court
action, if the property owner prevails in the action and the court determines
that the settlement offer, including the statement of allowable uses, of the
governmental entity or entities did not constitute a bona fide offer to the
property owner which reasonably would have resolved the claim, based upon the
knowledge available to the governmental entity or entities and the property
owner during the 90-day-notice period or the 150-day-notice period.
2. In any action
filed pursuant to this section, the governmental entity or entities are
entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred by the
governmental entity or entities from the date of the filing of the circuit
court action, if the governmental entity or entities prevail in the action and
the court determines that the property owner did not accept a bona fide
settlement offer, including the statement of allowable uses, which reasonably
would have resolved the claim fairly to the property owner if the settlement
offer had been accepted by the property owner, based upon the knowledge
available to the governmental entity or entities and the property owner during
the 90-day-notice period or the 150-day-notice period.
3. The determination
of total reasonable costs and attorney fees pursuant to this paragraph shall be
made by the court and not by the jury. Any proposed settlement offer or any
proposed decision, except for the final written settlement offer or the final
written statement of allowable uses, and any negotiations or rejections in
regard to the formulation either of the settlement offer or the statement of
allowable uses, are inadmissible in the subsequent proceeding established by
this section except for the purposes of the determination pursuant to this
paragraph.
(d) Within 15
days after the execution of any settlement pursuant to this section, or the
issuance of any judgment pursuant to this section, the governmental entity
shall provide a copy of the settlement or judgment to the Department of Legal
Affairs.
(7)(a) The
circuit court may enter any orders necessary to effectuate the purposes of this
section and to make final determinations to effectuate relief available under
this section.
(b) An award or
payment of compensation pursuant to this section shall operate to grant to and
vest in any governmental entity by whom compensation is paid the right, title,
and interest in rights of use for which the compensation has been paid, which
rights may become transferable development rights to be held, sold, or
otherwise disposed of by the governmental entity. When there is an award of
compensation, the court shall determine the form and the recipient of the
right, title, and interest, as well as the terms of their acquisition.
(8) This section
does not supplant methods agreed to by the parties and lawfully available for
arbitration, mediation, or other forms of alternative dispute resolution, and
governmental entities are encouraged to utilize such methods to augment or facilitate
the processes and actions contemplated by this section.
(9) This section
provides a cause of action for governmental actions that may not rise to the
level of a taking under the State Constitution or the United States
Constitution. This section may not necessarily be construed under the case law
regarding takings if the governmental action does not rise to the level of a
taking. The provisions of this section are cumulative, and do not abrogate any
other remedy lawfully available, including any remedy lawfully available for
governmental actions that rise to the level of a taking. However, a
governmental entity shall not be liable for compensation for an action of a
governmental entity applicable to, or for the loss in value to, a subject real property
more than once.
(10) This
section does not apply to any actions taken by a governmental entity which
relate to the operation, maintenance, or expansion of transportation
facilities, and this section does not affect existing law regarding eminent domain
relating to transportation.
(11) A cause of
action may not be commenced under this section if the claim is presented more
than 1 year after a law or regulation is first applied by the governmental
entity to the property at issue.
(a) For purposes
of determining when this 1-year claim period accrues:
1. A law or
regulation is first applied upon enactment and notice as provided for in this
subparagraph if the impact of the law or regulation on the real property is
clear and unequivocal in its terms and notice is provided by mail to the
affected property owner or registered agent at the address referenced in the
jurisdiction’s most current ad valorem tax records. The fact that the law or
regulation could be modified, varied, or altered under any other process or
procedure does not preclude the impact of the law or regulation on a property
from being clear or unequivocal pursuant to this subparagraph. Any notice under
this subparagraph shall be provided after the enactment of the law or
regulation and shall inform the property owner or registered agent that the law
or regulation may impact the property owner’s existing property rights and that
the property owner may have only 1 year from receipt of the notice to pursue
any rights established under this section.
2. Otherwise,
the law or regulation is first applied to the property when there is a formal
denial of a written request for development or variance.
(b) If an owner
seeks relief from the governmental action through lawfully available
administrative or judicial proceedings, the time for bringing an action under
this section is tolled until the conclusion of such proceedings.
(12) No cause of
action exists under this section as to the application of any law enacted on or
before May 11, 1995, or as to the application of any rule, regulation, or
ordinance adopted, or formally noticed for adoption, on or before that date. A
subsequent amendment to any such law, rule, regulation, or ordinance gives rise
to a cause of action under this section only to the extent that the application
of the amendatory language imposes an inordinate burden apart from the law,
rule, regulation, or ordinance being amended.
(13) In
accordance with s. 13, Art. X of the State Constitution, the state, for itself
and for its agencies or political subdivisions, waives sovereign immunity for
causes of action based upon the application of any law, regulation, or
ordinance subject to this section, but only to the extent specified in this
section.
Beyond the Fact there existed DISPARATE TREATMENT AS A SIGN OF DISCRIMNINATION AT THE GET GO, THERE EXISTED ALSO AS I PROVEDBEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT THAT THERENO EQUAL PROTECTION FOR ME AS A MEMBER OF THE PROTECTED CLASS, AND NOW WE FACE A THIRD ONE AT THE GET GO.
