most anti-aviation city in the nation

"Dan Horton" wrote in message
oups.com...
In our society we honor those who accept personal sacrifice for the
greater good of their peers. Please, consider clearing the field and
allowing the EAA to work for all.

Dan

Dan, I don't doubt that you feel "clearing the field" is the appropriate
thing to do, but I disagree with the notion that anyone would honour a
personal sacrifice in this case. While you have likely accused him of more
than the city of Jacksonville has I have yet to see that he has done
anything wrong other than refuse to knuckle under to an oppressive city
council and a bullying neighbour. Even if he loses, I would admire him for
going down swinging, more than taking one on the chin so others might ignore
his plight and go about their business. The core here is that the gentleman
as far as I can see has not injured or inconvenienced any of his neighbours
in this case, but has been subject to harassment and hostility aided by the
city council. I would be seriously considering suing the neighbour and the
council.

I disagree with the notion that anyone would honour a personal
sacrifice in this case.

Quietly pleading guilty to a non-criminal misdemeanor with a max
fine of $500 isn't much of a sacrifice. More than a few battles have
been won with a strategic retreat to a more advantageous position.

Throw aside your feelings and consider the reality. Brian is going
to pay the fine anyway. "Not guilty" is unlikely in the first court
appearance because he is facing a custom-written ordinance designed to
leave little wiggle room for the judge. In general you don't get to
argue constitutionality or other issues until you get into the appeals
process. That can take years and lots of money, which is why he is
asking for a legal defense fund. In the meantime the ordinance remains
hanging over everyone's head, and will become permanent if he loses an
appeal anywhere along the line.

Consider the alternative. Brian pleads guilty and promises to be a
model citizen. The city attorney gets his petty victory, and the EAA
attorney has a clear field to communicate and persuade. If the EAA is
successful, the ordinance is rescinded or modified via legislative
means. Game over, total cost $500, public relations for homebuilders
is positive. If unsuccessful, all Brian needs to do is park another
airplane in the driveway. He gets to pick the time (just prior to an
election is good) and the circumstances (a pretty airplane in the midst
of flawless housekeeping, with lots of photos), which means even if the
other side pulls out older evidence it is clear that Brian has tried to
mitigate. He also buys time to do legal research and raise money. If
the EAA has tried and failed, successful national fundraising among
homebuilders becomes a given. Hell, I'll contribute.

"Sue the *******s", "Go down fighting", and opinions about
personal freedom are expressions of emotion, not rational planning.
Please, let's talk about objectives, rational plans, and chances of
success.

Dan

"Dan Horton" wrote in message
ups.com...
I disagree with the notion that anyone would honour a personal
sacrifice in this case.

Quietly pleading guilty to a non-criminal misdemeanor with a max
fine of $500 isn't much of a sacrifice. More than a few battles have
been won with a strategic retreat to a more advantageous position.

Throw aside your feelings and consider the reality. Brian is going

It just doesn't and will never sit well with me, even if the fine was zero
dollars. The very notion that city council could design an ordinance
specifically to punish someone for his neighbours activities is just wrong.
I look at your argument and I can't believe you would expect anyone to
accept it. Strategic or not, it does not appear to me that Brian has done
anything wrong and I would never, ever plead guilty in his shoes. If
sentenced I would appeal, countersue, etc. Your country was founded on the
notion that gov't should never have the opportunity to oppress it's
citizens, what the hell happened?

I look at your argument and I can't believe you would expect anyone
to accept it.

Look again.

Brian WINS if the ordinance is successfully rescinded through
negotiation. He can return to homebuilding the next day.....along with
everyone else in JAX.

If the EAA fails, for sure nobody is asking him to give up. Quite the
contrary. If the EAA is unsuccessful he re-enters the fight with an
advantage in time, money, and circumstance, which is a whole lot more
than he has now.

If sentenced I would appeal, countersue, etc.

An appeal is obvious. You do realize that even if an appeal is
successful, a municipality usually just changes the ordinance so that
it falls within or avoids the specific constraint of the court?

Damn, I wish Tony Pucillo was still with us. We would get a no-bull
court assessment right quick.

Dan

Dan Horton wrote:
I look at your argument and I can't believe you would expect anyone
to accept it.

Look again.

Brian WINS if the ordinance is successfully rescinded through
negotiation. He can return to homebuilding the next day.....along with
everyone else in JAX.

If the EAA fails, for sure nobody is asking him to give up. Quite the
contrary. If the EAA is unsuccessful he re-enters the fight with an
advantage in time, money, and circumstance, which is a whole lot more
than he has now.

If sentenced I would appeal, countersue, etc.

An appeal is obvious. You do realize that even if an appeal is
successful, a municipality usually just changes the ordinance so that
it falls within or avoids the specific constraint of the court?

Damn, I wish Tony Pucillo was still with us. We would get a no-bull
court assessment right quick.

Dan

greatav8or wrote:
Dan Horton wrote:
I look at your argument and I can't believe you would expect anyone
to accept it.

Look again.

Brian WINS if the ordinance is successfully rescinded through
negotiation. He can return to homebuilding the next day.....along with
everyone else in JAX.

And everyone who loves freedom anywhere WINS if this ordinance is
smacked down in a court of law as the silly tomfoolery it is. Ya' got
to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything.

Luckily, the presiding judge isn't a fool.

From http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-onlin..._4469159.shtml

At the 2005 hearing, Duval County Judge Harold Arnold sided with Kraut.

"It is in keeping with a neighborhood to work on building, sanding,
restoring items as a hobby in a garage," Arnold wrote. He added: "It is
unreasonable to assume that residents do not do repair and restoration
work in their garages."

from last sundays florida times union newspaper.
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-onlin..._4469159.shtml

"greatav8or" wrote:
from last sundays florida times union newspaper.
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-onlin..._4469159.shtml

The more publicity like this, the better.

Jim Logajan wrote:
"greatav8or" wrote:
from last sundays florida times union newspaper.
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-onlin..._4469159.shtml

The more publicity like this, the better.

One question, a couple comments.

What page was it on?

Too bad the website doesn't allow reader comments (some newspapers'
websites do this).

The city council looks pretty dumb in that article (which is accurate, I
believe).