Hearing set for August 18, 6 p.m. at the Courthouse Annex
Lazaro Aleman
ECB Publishing, Inc.
County officials this week are scheduled to take another run at an ordinance that aims to set rules and regulations for the county’s recreational facilities, a document that has been more than a year in the making.
County Attorney Heather Encinosa is finalizing the ordinance, which she inherited from her predecessor and which has now undergone numerous iterations. The ordinance is set for the first of two required public hearings on Thursday evening, Aug. 18, preparatory to its adoption. Given the document’s tortuous history, however, don’t be surprised if it’s returned to the attorney for more reworking.
Indeed, if past discussions of the issue are any indication, approval of the ordinance may yet bog down. That’s because at every discussion so far, old problems are rehashed, new problems identified, and the document is returned to the attorneys for more revisions and additions.
The problems most specifically apply to the Wacissa River Park. These include alleged rowdy behavior, alcohol consumption, vendors doing business on public property, dogs running loose, unauthorized parking in the designated lot and up and down SR-59, and littering.
Commissioners are in agreement that the situation “is a mess.” What they haven’t been able to agree on so far, however, is a solution. Complicating the situation is a side feud between two local canoe vendors that often monopolize the discussions.
But the overarching problem, as Commissioner Stephen Walker put it recently, is the lack of consistent oversight of the park grounds.
“You can have all the rules in the world,” Walker said. “But if you don’t have a monitor on it, it all kind of goes out the window.”
Encinosa agreed, noting that putting rules on paper wasn’t difficult, but making the rules stick was something else.
Pressure, however, has been mounting for a solution, even if it’s a drastic one, such charging an entrance fee to access the park. The latter idea, in fact, keeps resurfacing and appears to be gaining traction.
At the last discussion of the issue on July 7, three of the commissioners expressed a willingness to impose some kind of fee, it that’s what it would take to correct the situation.
Commissioner J.C. Surles set the tone, sharing a conversation he had had with an officer from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), whom he said primarily patrols the riverhead.
“He thinks it’s ridiculous this Hatfield and McCoy thing over these kayak rentals,” Surles said. “He is more concerned that this board is not protecting this precious resource by charging an admission to do cleanup and fix the broken dock. I know that’s something Commissioner Walker has been firm about not doing. But this officer said, you’re the only ones in the area that don’t charge some sort of permit, pass, or whatever, and so you’re letting this small, precious resource get inundated and overrun. That’s where the wrongdoing is being done, he said, by this board not controlling the access.”
Surles noted that parks in Wakulla County all had limited parking and the rule was enforced, with as much as a $125 citation per violation.
“We’ve got somehow to protect that resource down there because the spring is paying for it now with all this traffic,” Surles said. “The officer said that it’s ignorance that we’re not doing something to limit the traffic and charge a fee. That will slow people from coming here from everywhere because they know it’s free and they can get there and do whatever.”
Commissioners Betsy Barfield and Chris Tuten expressed support for the fee idea.
“I agree 100 percent,” Barfield said. “It’s got to be manned and a fee put in place for outside users. We are burning through staff time, law enforcement time and our time, going over this over and over again. I believe we’re the last park on earth that allows use without a fee. I think we should pass the ordinance and set some fees for the park. And vendors should have to pay a launch fee. This would apply to out of county people only.”
Tuten agreed.
“I don’t see why we can’t charge out of town people,” he said. “The people that abuse the river are not going to pay to come into the park. The one’s that pay are the ones who are going to respect it. It will cut down on the traffic and cut down on the problems. The less people you have, the less problems you have.”
The attorneys, however, cautioned that while the county was within its right to impose user fees, distinguishing between residents and non-residents could put the county at risk of losing federal funding. If the county wanted to impose fees based on such distinctions, it had better justify them on a reasonable basis, they said.
“I believe that you’re getting into some grey waters there,” one of the attorneys said.
The way the discussion was left was that the attorneys were to do some more fine-tuning to the ordinance in preparation for the Aug. 18 public hearing and the hoped-for eventual adoption.
The idea is that once the ordinance is in place and the rules posted, deputies will have the legal basis for enforcement. The idea also is to have a part-time county employee onsite on weekends to monitor the situation.