Federal Judge Howard's May Court Order in favor of the artists included these words.".....the relief sought was specifically limited to enjoining the enforcement of the Ordinance against visual artists"
So the City administration who created the original ban because they did not like the "flea market" atmosphere of merchandise peddlers has now decided to allow a free for all of vendors with gasoline generators and large displays back into the Plaza de la Constitucion. They insist that they cannot tell the difference between a painting and a frozen banana.
Does any one have any idea why the City of St. Augustine would act so much against the public opinion Do you think that this is showing contempt of the Federal restraining order?
These photo's were taken last Saturday 6-20. The Plaza had four visual artists and nine merchandise vendors set up.
the city of st. augustine administration is comptemptible
ReplyDeleteappeal
ReplyDeleteappeal.....how do you mean? To whom?
ReplyDeleteThis is B.S.!!! COMPLAIN!!!
ReplyDeleteJoseph L. Boles - Mayor/Commissioner
904.824.4278 or josephboles@comcast.net
Errol D. Jones - Vice-Mayor/Commissioner
jones2002@erroldjones.com or Call 904.825.1006
Leanna Freeman - Commissioner
cityfreeman@yahoo.com or 904.829.1960
Nancy Sikes-Kline - Commissioner
904.806.6203 or NancySikesKline@aol.com
Don Crichlow - Commissioner
crich@aug.com or 904.824.5785
Bill Harriss - City Manager
904.825.1006 or cosa@ci.st-augustine.fl.us
All of those people listed above are aware of the situation and our stance.Be patient. Wait and see.
ReplyDeleteContext. All of you will soon see the damage G.T. has caused and will cause these artists.
ReplyDeleteWhen you try to manipulate the system by deliberately getting arrested to manufacture outcomes, unintended consequences will ensue.
You have taken that quote out of context. Judge Howard said the reason she did not enjoin the city from enforcing the ordinance in its entirety was because releif was only requested for the four artists. She was very careful to say that.
Using ignorance just may be bliss...
ReplyDeleteseems like the City is just trying to "stir the pot"...they want to get all the local merchants up in arms and on their side. By allowing the flea market back in the Plaza (via playing the ignorance card) is their way of justifying their illegal ordinances....
Why do you,Mr.Anonymous Poster,claim that any punative action taken by the city would all be the "fault" of Greg Travous?
ReplyDeleteIf the city has a problem with G.T.you seem to feel that they should punish ALL of the artists in order to "get even" with one person who has been successful in the fight for your rights.
My arrests for offering art for sale have little bearing on the Federal case taken before Judge Howard. I am not one of the plaintiffs.
If it is your intention to misdirect the blame to me, it will not work.The city's ordinances have been shown to be illegal.Take your accusations to those who wrote the ordinance.
That's a very cryptic warning that you write, "All of you will soon see the damage G.T. has caused and will cause these artists." You imply that you have inside information. Who are you and do you work for the city?
Carlos... err... anonymous... You talk a good talk, but obviously you were'nt at the injunction hearing when the judge pointed out that the plaintiffs were only asking that the city be enjoined from enforcing 22-6 against visual artists, and Gray Thomas replied, "That's our intent, Your Honor." Obviously, the reason for that was because the ordinance, as applied to merchandise vendors, NOT VISUAL ARTISTS, was not in dispute as unconstitutional.
ReplyDeleteSo don't try to make it seem like Judge Howard singled out only those four artists... it applies to VISUAL ARTISTS, whose work is protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
Maybe when you get to be something other than a Junior Attorney, (lackie) you'll get to make arguments in Federal Court too.
I have seen your handiwork while you were with the State Attorney's Office and was not impressed with it then and certainly am less impressed with your rants now.
Better watch out before someone does a public information demand for computer transmissions from your desk... are you copying your boss on these comments? I'm sure the Commissioners would be interested in observing your behavior on this blog... spiteful, immature and now threatening. Get control of yourself man.
Quoted "All of you will soon see the damage G.T. has caused and will cause these artists."
ReplyDeleteIs this a person in City Hall? If not, it is a person who is close to the "powers that be".
This is a direct threat! This sounds like some kind of fascist memo of warning.
Watch this person carefully. He or she is cowardly using anonymous posts.
G.T. is responsible for the artists getting kicked out of the plaza. Anyone who asserts any facts that demonstrate this is branded as:
ReplyDelete--having a personal vendetta against him, or
--being part of some municipal/cutter gallery conspiracy aimed at keeping the street artist down, or
--shoving some mean-spirited point of view on somebody else.
G.T. doesn't know a fact from an opinion and he doesn't know how to read a legal opinion.
I'm not Carlos. I don't work for the city. I'm all about Art in the Free Market. And particularly because it's so bloddy hot out, I'm also about Frozen Bannanas in the Free Market.
"Is this a person in City Hall? If not, it is a person who is close to the "powers that be"."
ReplyDeleteIt is Ron Brown trying to create propaganda.
You want people to read the sites RON, well you have your way.
IT IS ALL RON BROWN AND HIS CLICK CAUSING THE PROBLEM
THEY MEET FOR COFFEE AND THEY TELL HIM WHAT TO DO
HE IS NOT WORKING FOR US HE WORKS FOR SPECIAL PEOPLE
Let me see If I got this right MR. City Sympathizer also know as Anonymous . Wish you could put a number on your Anonymous label so I could have a decent dialog with you and know I am talking to the same miss guided person through the thread of this discussion .
ReplyDeleteI find it fascinating to look into the the way the city thinks which I suspect you are close to. You may tell me I am wrong. I don't mind. Or maybe you are to timid to answer as many of the City council are during the city meetings. They hide behind the fact that it is for public comment they forget that that doesn't mean they can't make a comment. They could if they wished ( insert chicken sound here. ) Now for the meat of this discussion.
you contend that there is retribution coming to the artists . That maybe true. By the way that is a very popular view held by the present Government of Iran , Crush the protesters ! That is not unusual from out of control government that doesn't like to be reminded their roll is to serve the people and not the other way around. At this present point that is how our government is supposed to work . ( seems you have a problem with that , just a guess ) I guess to be fair I need to ask you , Do you feel the city's agenda out ways our constitutional Rights ? Is that in Question in your mind ? Lets be clear. Go ahead and step up . Don't go for the usual smoke screen of misdirection. Sometimes people just love to use that ploy. Be clear about it .
So the retribution would be coming because of What ? The city finds it to distasteful to follow the law ? They are embarrassed because their ignorants is showing ? Could it be the the merchants are putting pressure on the ones that that pass the illegal ordnance ?
Tell me what is so important in the City's interest that they try to pass a law violating someones rights. By the way that is what happened. notice the Judges ruling.
Let me ask you now if you aren't to afraid to give an answer. Do you feel the city should crack down on Visual Artists and if so Why? What could possibly be your reason ? Oh I would love to hear it.
In a way you sound like perhaps you were on the City's legal team that got smoked and were way out of your league.
You guys weren't ready to play in the Big leagues that is why the city had to pay over 50,000 dollars or was it more. It seems you were lost once you got out of the good old boy network !
The city got in too deep and they had to have the tax payers bail them out with a high priced attorney who only wound up loosing badly. You sound like a Bitter individual who has landed on the ash heap of Broken dreams and the taste of bitter ash in your mouth.
I will be watching for your reply. Please don't be afraid of Dialog like the city council.
quote from anon." releif (sic) was only requested for the four artists. She (the judge) was very careful to say that."
ReplyDeleteMost of us do not need to go to law school to read a court decision. Judge Howard's order was not directed toward a "people ban" but she reaffirmed that prints, paintings, sculpture and photographs were constitutionally protected and enforcement of an ordinance banning the sale and display of those wares is illegal.
Well well well. We have now heard the city's offer of what they WANT to pay. what are they going to pay Kahn for all this? His bill is probably more than the total payout of the settlement will be. What about what WE the tax payers of this city want to pay?
ReplyDeleteThe residents have spoken by retaining Boles and Jones. So keep eating till the next election.
ReplyDeleteQuote:"The residents have spoken by retaining Boles and Jones. So keep eating till the next election."
ReplyDeleteWhat does that mean? I'm not understanding you
Put the paranoid stick down.
ReplyDelete"keep eating" is a reference to the nic "fed up." It's not a threat by some big city bad guy who wants to keep you down. The response to fed up is simply that the residents entitled to vote kept the elected officials who made decisions contrary to the artists.
Maybe you should cool off with an italian ice.
Re: keep eating
ReplyDeleteNot paranoid...just didn't understand your obscure joke.That was a joke wasn't it?
By the way, Why so snarky in your comments. Did an artist once hurt you or somthin?