HomeMy Public PortalAboutPRR 16-2172From: Chris O'Hare [mailto:chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 6:24 PM
To: Rita Taylor <RTaylor@gulf-stream.org>; Bill Thrasher <bthrasher@gulf-stream.org>
Subject: Public Record Request - brandenburg - style litigation
Dear Custodian of Records,
I wish to inspect certain public records for the purpose of informing myself of the historic
and current workings of the Town of Gulf Stream and its associated entities, vendors,
consultants, advisers, contractors and agents. The records I wish to inspect may also
be material to current, anticipated or presently unforeseen legal action. The production
of any and all responsive records is therefore urgent and must be acted upon in
compliance with Florida Statutes and established case law as soon as possible. If you
are not the custodian of the public records described herein please determine who that
person is and notify me immediately in order that I may make this request to the
appropriate person without delay. In all cases please reference Florida Statutes and
appropriate case law when responding to this record request.
Please read this entire request carefully and respond accordingly.
This email is a singular request for public records through the agency known as of the
Town of Gulf Stream. Please respond to this public record request in a singular manner
and do not combine this public record request with any other public record requests
when responding to this request. Do NOT produce any records other than records
responsive to this request. Please identify by name the person or persons responding to
this request.
Before making this public record request, I first searched online and in the public
records portion of your agency's website hoping I could locate the public records I seek
without having to trouble you for it. Unfortunately I can not find the records I wish to
examine.
NOTE: This is a request for public records in the custody of Special Magistrate Gary
Brandenburg ONLY. Please do NOT produce any records in the custodv of the Town of
Gulf Stream. Limit your response to ONLY records in Mr. Brandenburq's custody.
As background to this record request I call your attention to the attached Special
Magistrate Order CASE NO. 15-1 which was signed by Mr. Gary Brandenburg on
March 22, 2016. Specifically paragraph 2 on page 5 in which Brandenburg writes:
During the litigation, the style of house and roof covering allowed by Town
Code was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this
Code Enforcement hearing.
Since the enforcement of Town code section 70-238 is only applicable to O'Hare's
property if indeed the style of O'Hare's house has been determined, please
produce any record in the custody of Gary Brandenburg that supports his
statement, or any record Brandenburg reviewed, referenced or relied upon in
order to conclude that the style of O'Hare's home "was litigated extensively and is
not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing."
Another way of describing the record I wish to inspect, that may clarify but does
not replace my previous description, is: What record did Brandenburg have
knowledge of that caused him to confidently write, "the style of house... allowed
by Town Code was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this
Code Enforcement hearing."
I make this request pursuant to Article 1, Section 24 of the Florida
Constitution and Chapter 119 of the Florida Statutes.
If you contend that any of the records I am seeking, or any portion thereof, are exempt
from inspection or disclosure please cite the specific exemption as required
by 6119.07(1)(e) of the Florida Statutes and state in writing and with particularity the
basis for your conclusions as required by �119.07(1)(f) of the Florida Statutes.
Please take note of $119.07(1)(c) Florida Statues and your affirmative obligation to (1)
promptly acknowledge receipt of this public records request and (2) make a good faith
effort which "includes making reasonable efforts to determine from other officers or
employees within the agency whether such a record exists and, if so, the location at
which the record can be accessed." I am, therefore, requesting that you
notify every individual in possession of records that may be responsive to this public
records request to preserve all such records on an immediate basis.
If the public records being sought are maintained by your agency in an electronic format
please produce the records in the original electronic format in which they were created
or received. See 6119.01(2)(f), Florida Statutes.
Please provide only those records for inspection that do not require extensive use of
information technologies or extensive staff time or both in excess of 15 minutes. Take
note of 6119.07(4)(a)3.(d) Florida Statues and if you anticipate that any records exist,
the production for inspection of which will require extensive use of information
technologies or extensive staff time or both in excess of 15 minutes, then
please provide those records that can be produced within the first 15 minutes
and advise me of the cost you anticipate to be incurred by your agency for the
remaining records prior to incurring this cost. Please do not incur any costs on my
behalf without first obtaining my written authorization to proceed. If you produce only a
portion of all existing responsive records, please tell me that your response includes
only a portion of all existing records responsive to this request.
If you anticipate the need to incur any costs that I would be statutorily required to pay in
order to inspect these public records which would exceed $1.00 please notify me in
advance of your incurring that cost with a written estimate of the total cost. Please be
sure to itemize any estimates so as to indicate the total number of pages and/or
records, as well as to distinguish the cost of labor and materials. Again, please do not
incur any costs on my behalf without first obtaining my written authorization to proceed.
The phrase Town of Gulf Stream used herein refers to the Town in its entirety including
all employees, appointees, officials, assignees, counsel and consultants including Town
Manager, Town Clerk, Town Police Chief, Town Commissioners, Town Mayor, Town
Departments, Town Police Officers, Town Employees, Town Engineer, the law firm
(Jones Foster Johnston & Stubbs P.A.) that claims to be the Town Attorney including all
attorney, partner and employee members of that firm; the Town Counsel of Sweetapple,
Broeker & Varkus including all attorney, partner and employee members of that firm, the
Town Counsel of Richman Greer, P.A. including all attorney, partner and employee
members of that firm and any other entity associated with the Town and subject to
public records law.
The term public records used herein has the same meaning and scope as the definition
of Public records adopted by the Florida Legislature as Statutes Chapter 119. A record
that does not exist because of its disposition requires the creation of a disposition
record. In all instances where you determine a record does not exist please determine if
the record once existed and in its stead provide the disposition record for my inspection.
I hereby reserve all rights granted to me under the Florida Constitution and Florida
Statutes.
All responses to this public records request should be made in writing to the following
email address:
chrisoharegulfstream(cDgmail.com
ORDER
TOWN OF GULF STREAM
100 Sea Rd.
Gulf Stream, FL 33483-7427
SPECIAL MAGISTRATE ORDER
CASE NO. 15-1
PROPERTY OWNER: CHRISTOPHER F. O'HARE
2520 AVENUE AU SOLEIL
GULF STREAM, FL
PCN: 20-43-46-04-22-000-0360
THIS MATTER came before the Special Magistrate for a hearing held at Town
Hall on March 7, 2016, pursuant to a Notice of Violation issued by the Town of Gulf
Stream ("Town") to Christopher F. O'Hare ("Respondent') on August 14, 2015. The
Notice of Violation (NOV) alleged the following violations:
SEC. 42-29 CONSTRUCTION ABANDONMENT
SEC. 70-238 ROOFS
SEC. 70-99 ROOF DESIGN, SLOPE & MATERIALS
The Town set the matter for hearing, which was convened on Friday, December 4,
2015, at 10:00 a.m. The Respondent and his attorney, Mr. Roeder, were present. Mr.
Randolph, the Town Attorney, and Mr. Thatcher, the Town Manager, were also present.
The Respondent requested a postponement because he was not afforded pre -
hearing discovery which typically occurs in Circuit Court trials. The postponement was
denied. There is no process allowing pre -hearing discovery, other than the issuance of
subpoenas by the Special Magistrate, and Public Records Requests, both processes which
the Respondent was aware of and utilized.
On December 4, the hearing began at 10:00 am. and the proceeding adjourned at
4:15 p.m.
Christopher F. O'Hare
Case No. 15-1
Page 2
Several attempts were made to re -convene the hearing, to no avail. Respondent
terminated his attorney shortly before a scheduled hearing and was not able to find
suitable counsel. On another occasion the proceedings began and were shortly thereafter
adjourned due to medical issues that required the Respondent to be transported to a
hospital. Respondent's doctors requested that the hearing not occur for a period of time.
On Monday, March 7, 2016, the hearing was continued. The Town appeared with
the same representation. The Respondent appeared pro se, with two assistants, both
attorneys, one of which was his attorney on the first day of the hearing. He was now
offered as a witness. The hearing re -convened at 10:00 a.m. and concluded with closing
arguments completed at approximately 6:00 p.m.
During the two days of hearing, the Town presented 24 exhibits, some composite
with several pages, marked T-1 through T-24. The Respondent proposed 41 exhibits,
some composite with several pages, all of which were admitted with the exception of R-
32 (composite), R-35, and R-31. The parties agreed the Special Magistrate could take
time to review the evidence and submit a written order, waiving the requirement that the
decision be announced at the conclusion of the hearing, and that a written order would
follow in ten (10) days. It was agreed the decision would be mailed to the parties. Both
parties were given the opportunity to submit proposed Findings of Fact, and did.
BURDEN OF PROOF
The Town carries the burden of showing the violation occurred by producing
evidence that must be competent and substantial.
SUMMARY OF CASE
Section 42-29 Construction Abandonment
The Respondent applied for and received a re -roofing permit on August 30, 2011.
Permit No. 11-135146 was issued to Rooftec Corporation, the Respondent's contractor.
As of the date this hearing concluded, Respondent's previous roof had been
removed, and new underlayment and waterproofing had been added. The roof remains
unfinished with no tile or finishing roofing material in place.
The Town contends the permit is inactive under Florida Building Code Section
105.4.1.3, which requires an approved inspection every 180 days. The Town, therefore,
reasons that the Respondent has not completed construction of the re -roofing project
within the timefirame of the Building Permit and is in violation of Section 42-29.
Christopher F. O'Hare
Case No. 15-1
Page 3
The Respondent asserts several defenses to the Town's argument.
The Town of Gulf Stream has an Interlocal Agreement dated 30 September, 2009,
with the City of Delray Beach ("Delray") that provides for Delray to act as the Town's
Building Department (T-5). Prior to November 15, 2009, the County served as the
Town's Building Department. Pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding between the
Town Manager, Building Official for Delray Beach, and County Building officials, the
arrangement with the County was terminated and Delray undertook the responsibility on
November 15, 2009. There was a provision to allow County officials to act on permits
after November 15, 2009, in certain circumstances (paragraph 2.b., T-15)
The Respondent points out that the Interlocal Agreement between the Town and
Delray was not recorded in the Public Records, as required by Florida Statute §
163.01(11) until February 11, 2013, (ORB 25785, Page 0534) and, therefore, was not
effective on August 30, 2011, when the Building Permit was issued and that secondly,
Section 42-29 of the Codified Codes and Ordinances of the Town still refers to "a
Building Permit issued by the County". Since the permit was not issued by the County, it
does not fall within the abandonment language of § 42-29.
Both of these arguments are rejected.
Section 42-26 of the Town Code, enacted on November 13, 2009, corresponding
approximately to the date of the Interlocal Agreement, was an Ordinance providing that
Delray's Building Codes would apply. Section 42-27 also provided that Delray would
issue all permits and conduct inspections. All parties understood and followed the
procedure of applying to Delray for the re -roofing permit. The Delray Beach Building
Official testified that the previous Building Official had determined the permit was
inactive, and he had no reason or information to contradict his decision. The Town and
Delray relied on the Florida Building Code to determine when a permit becomes inactive.
The first paragraph of § 42-29 refers to the time period when the County issued the
permits, and active County -issued permits after Delray took over as the Town's Building
Department, and is merely a relic of the past. Respondent was cited with paragraph 2,
which deals with keeping a building permit active whether issued by Delray or, as was
previously the case, the County.
It should be noted that if Respondent's first argument regarding the Interlocal
Agreement was correct, and Delray did not have the authority to act as the Town's
Building Department, Respondent would never have had a valid permit to begin the re-
roofing project. Respondent never applied for permits from the County, as that process
had been replaced. The parties' actions confirm, and a long history shows, all involved
knew and processed the permits through Delray.
Christopher F. O'Hare
Case No. 15-1
Page 4
Next, Respondent argues that the inspection to keep the re -roofing permit active
did not have to be by a Delray Beach Inspector. Testimony offered by Respondent
showed that under certain conditions such as "threshold buildings" and other complicated
structures, Building Departments will allow and accept other qualified professionals to
conduct inspections on behalf of the Department. There was no testimony or evidence to
suggest that the Town or the City of Delray Beach Building Department authorized
anyone other than Delray inspectors to conduct roofing inspections on Respondent's
house. There is no need to comment on Respondent's evidence regarding delivery of
inspections by unauthorized persons to Delray. The last inspection by a Delray employee
was April 26, 2012. The permit became inactive under the Florida Building Code on
November 26, 2012. The most the Respondent was able to show were several letters
from T.E. Lunn, PE, LLC, addressed to Respondent, indicating additional hot -mopping
of material to offset deterioration of the underlayment due to excessive exposure for long
periods, to prevent water intrusion. There is no evidence that Delray accepted these as
valid inspections. There was no evidence of the project progressing towards completion.
Next, Respondent argues that he did not receive notice that the Building Permit
was inactive. At the very least, Respondent was put on Notice of the inactive permit
when he received the Notice of Violation on August 5, 2015, four months prior to the
commencement of this hearing. In addition, the Delray Beach Building Department
testified that Notices of Inactive Permits were typically given when an owner called for
an inspection or other activity on the permit. Since there were no inspections requested
from Delray after April 26, 2012, there was no notification.
Next Respondent argues that the expiration of the permit was tolled by virtue of
legal proceedings. Attorney Roeder testified that there was active legal activity on
Respondent's roof since 2012. FloridaBuilding Code § 105.4.1 provides the 180 day
period "shall not be applicable in case(s) ... when the building work is halted due
directly to judicial injunction, order or similar process." Respondent failed to show any
order from any of the litigation that required the work on the roof to be halted. The only
testimony with respect to this issue was that Respondent was not happy with the type of
roofing the Town would allow and voluntarily waited to finish the work in the hope of a
Court order which would allow his preferred choice.
Section 70-238 Roofs
Respondent wanted a metal roof. This request was denied by the Town Manager.
Respondent appealed to the Board of Adjustment, resulting in the denial of his request.
Respondent filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari with the Circuit Court for the 151
Judicial Circuit (T-8), which was denied Per Curiam (T-9). That decision was appealed
to the Fourth District Court of Appeals, and the Court denied the petition on its merits (T-
10).
Christopher F. O'Hare
Case No. 15-1
Page 5
Respondent then applied for a revised Building Permit to install a "solar
sandwich" roof, which was denied. Respondent appealed to the Board of Adjustment and
the Board denied his appeal. Respondent filed a petition for Writ of Certiorari with the
15's Judicial Circuit, appealing the denial. The denial by the Board of Adjustment was
affirmed Per Curiam (T-11).
During the litigation, the style of house and roof covering allowed by Town Code
was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement
hearing.
The evidence is clear that there is no file or any other protective material over the
underlayment which is in place on Respondent's roof. Although it has been thoroughly
argued and decided in previous litigation what type of tile must be used on Respondent's
house; it is clear that some type of finished roof material must be installed, and there is
none.
Section 70-99 Roof Design, Slone & Materials
Section 70-99 prohibits inconsistent roofing materials visible from the exterior of
the property.. The preamble of § 70-99 reads:
"Roofs are a major visual element and should be carefully considered as to
the proportion, texture, color and compatibility with both the house style
and neighboring buildings. Similarities in roof types create a visual
continuity in the streetscape and neighborhood. Broad low roof lines with
overhanging eaves provide a reassuring sense of shelter and create shade
for underlying windows."
The testimony presented established that Respondent's roof, consisting of hot -
mopped underlayment, was visible from the exterior and inconsistent with Town Code,
which requires a finished layer of approved tile or other approved material. It is also
inconsistent with the roofs on homes in Respondent's neighborhood. Roofing consisting
of underlayment only is not permitted and is not consistent with the Town Code.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Christopher O'Hare is the owner (Respondent) at 2520 Avenue Au Soleil, Gulf
Stream, FL 33483.
2. The Notice of Violation dated August 4, 2015, was properly served by Hand
Delivery on August 5, 2015.
Christopher F. O'Hare
Case No. 15-1
Page 6
3. The Notice of Hearing was properly served and Respondent was present with
counsel on December 4, 2015, and again pro se on March 7, 2016, with two
Attorney advisors.
4. The summary of the case is incorporated in these Findings of Fact.
5. The Town has shown, by substantial competent evidence, violations of Section
42-29, Section 70-238, and Section 70-99.
COMPLIANCE
The Respondent is'lhereby ordered to bring his property into compliance by:
A. Installing a flat, white thru and thru, smooth uncoated tile; or
B. Installing similar tile to what was removed. (The Building Permit expired,
requiring the Respondent to restore the roof with the previous covering.) This
was an S-shaped terra cotta tile, identified at the hearing as Exhibit T-20
(Barcelona 900), or other similar tile approved by the Town; or
C. Apply a roofing material that is otherwise approved by the Town. I will note that
continuous applications, demands, and appeals will not suffice as a reason to
delay compliance.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above Findings of Fact constitute a violation of the Sections of the Codes and
Laws of the Town of Gulf Stream set forth above.
It is the Order of this Special Magistrate that Respondent shall comply, as set
forth above, by June 1, 2016, with this Order. Failure to comply may subject the
Respondent to fines and liens upon the property that is the subject of this hearing, and all
other property owned by Respondent in Palm Beach County. Administrative costs of
$150.00 are awarded to the Town, which Respondent will pay within 10 days.
Christopher F. O'Hare
Case No. 15-1
Page 7
The Town is ordered to inspect the property on June 1, 2016, and, if it is not
found to be in compliance, to convene a hearing to determine compliance with this Order
and such other matters that are deemed appropriate.
DONE AND ORDERED this 7-2eyof March, 2016
G M. randenburg, Special M lstrate
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF 2001M &?Iq(�j
vai The foregoing was swom to, subscribed and acknowledged before me on this the
as day of f%9f RCN 2016, by Gary M. Brandenbur , as Special Magistrate
for the Town of Gulf Stream, Florida. He i personally known to me r has produced
as
(SEAL)
Notary Public-USignature /
r'se)o/ra L y,,,) /V a
Notary Public — Print Name
Commissioner No.: F/= / 93 9S�l
My Commissioner Expires: 313 /.9
SANDRA LYNN MALLOY
.;
MYCOMMISSIONOFF193V
EXPIRES: Match 31, 2919
Bonded Thm Netery PcbkUndemrhm
Notary Public-USignature /
r'se)o/ra L y,,,) /V a
Notary Public — Print Name
Commissioner No.: F/= / 93 9S�l
My Commissioner Expires: 313 /.9
TOWN OF GULF STREAM
PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
Delivered via e-mail
May 6, 2016
Chris O'Hare [mail to: chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com]
Re: GS #2172 (brandenburg - style litigation)
As background to this record request I call your attention to the attached Special Magistrate Order
CASE NO. 15-1 which was signed by Mr. Gary Brandenburg on March 22, 2016. Specifically
paragraph 2 on page 5 in which Brandenburg writes: During the litigation, the style of house and
roof covering allowed by Town Code was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited
in this Code Enforcement hearing. Since the enforcement of Town code section 70-238 is only
applicable to O'Hare's property if indeed the style of O'Hare's house has been determined, please
produce any record in the custody of Gary Brandenburg that supports his statement, or any record
Brandenburg reviewed, referenced or relied upon in order to conclude that the style of
O'Hare's home "was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code
Enforcement hearing. " Another way of describing the record I wish to inspect, that may clary
but does not replace my previous description, is: not record did Brandenburg have knowledge
of that caused him to confidently write, "the style of house... allowed by Town Code was litigated
extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing. "
Dear Chris O'Hare [mail to: chrisohareeulfstreamaemail.coml,
The Town of Gulf Stream has received your public records requests dated April 29, 2016. The
original public record request can be found at the following links httv://www2.gulf-
stream.org/weblink/O/doc/90364/Pagel.asi)x
Please be advised that the Town of Gulf Stream is currently working on a large number of
incoming public records requests. The Town will use its very best efforts to respond to you in a
reasonable amount of time with the appropriate response or an estimated cost to respond.
Sincerely, Town Clerk, Custodian of the Records
From: Chris O'Hare [mailto:chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 4:50 PM
To: gary@brandenburgpa.com; Rita Taylor <RTaylor@gulf-stream.org>; Bill Thrasher <bthrasher@gulf-
stream.org>
Subject: follow up Fwd: GS #2172 (brandenburg - style litigation)
Dear Custodian of Records,
I am in receipt of your standard form letter wherein you seek more time to respond because you are
"currently working on a large number of
incoming public records requests."
I hope the Custodian of Records for Mr. Brandenburg is not likewise prevented from acting on this record request
promptly and your current work load won't prevent him from providing the records to you so you can provide them to me.
In order to save time and any unnecessary effort on your part, why not ask Mr. Brandenburg to provide the public records
directly to me for my inspection?
I remind you that I specifically requested to inspect Public records in the custody of Special Magistrate
May I hear from you or from Mr. Brandenburg soon?
Have a great weekend,
Chris O'Hare
From: Gary Brandenburg [mailto:gary@brandenburgpa.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2016 11:58 AM
To: Chris O'Hare<chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com>
Cc: Rita Taylor <RTaylor@gulf-stream.org>; Bill Thrasher <bthrasher@gulf-stream.org>
Subject: Re: follow up Fwd: GS #2172 (brandenburg - style litigation)
Mr. O'Hare
Under the new legislation you are required to request any public records held by contractors
from the city.
Please do not contact me again regarding Gulf Stream public records.
From: Chris O'Hare [mailto:chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2016 2:32 PM
To: Gary Brandenburg <gary@brandenburgpa.com>
Cc: Rita Taylor <RTaylor@gulf-stream.org>; Bill Thrasher <bthrasher@gulf-stream.org>
Subject: Re: follow up Fwd: GS #2172 (brandenburg - style litigation)
Mr. Brandenburg,
You write, "Please do not contact me again regarding Gulf Stream public records." To this I again remind you
I DO NOT WANT TO INSPECT RECORDS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM.
I do not know how to be any more clear to you on this matter. I won't to inspect records in your
custody ONLY.
The new law does not prohibit me from contacting you at the same time that I contact the Town.
I contacted you as a courtesy to you so you would have a copy of my request to the Town. I also
thought contacting you at the same time as I contact the Town would help to expedite the
production of the public records I want to inspect.
I have already told you that I consider the production of this record urgent as it may be material
to a legal action.
You are required by law to assist the Town in the production of responsive records that are in
your custody. The Town writes that they are too busy working on other record requests. to
produce these records now. Are you too busy as well?
I asked for a simple record that must exist but I have been unable to find it anywhere. You must
have it since you refer to it in your Order in the matter of CE 15-1. Perhaps if you review of your
notes from the hearing (another record I have already requested to inspect) you will find the
source for the record that is the subject of this request.
Here is the request again for your reference:
Any record in the custody of Gary Brandenburg that supports his statement, or any record
Brandenburg reviewed, referenced or relied upon in order to conclude that the style of O'Hare's home
"was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing."
May I hear from you soon?
Sincerely,
Chris O'Hare
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Gary Brandenburg <gary r+,brandenburena.com> wrote:
Mr. O'Hare
I do not know how My previous response can be any more clear. I do not
have any Public records described in the request you have referenced in
this email.
All evidence from the hearing is in the position of the Town. The Town has
a tape of the meeting.
Gary Brandenburg, Esq.
Brandenburg & Associates, P.A.
11891 U.S. Highway One, Suite 100
North Palm Beach, FL 33408
(5611799-1414
(561) 371-1824 (cell)
(561) 758-7496 (Sandy cell)
Ga ryCdBra ndenburePA.com
From: Chris O'Hare [mailto:chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 8:50 PM
To: gary@brandenburgpa.com; Bill Thrasher <bthrasher@gulf-stream.org>; Rita Taylor <RTaylor@gulf-
stream.org>
Subject: Re: follow up Fwd: GS #2172 (brandenburg - style litigation)
Mr. Brandenburg,
Thank you for your continued response to my record request.
I remind you I seek to inspect a public record that must exist because you reference it in your
Order in the matter of Town of Gulf Stream CE 15-1. You very clearly wrote on page five of
your Order, "During the litigation, the style of house and roof covering allowed by Town Code
was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing. "
The style of my home is material to whether or not I was in violation of Town code Section 70-
238. You determined my home was in violation of section 70-238 and you claim the style of my
home was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement
hearing. I do not believe the style of my home has ever been litigated but since you have
determined that it has indeed been litigated and by inference that a court of competent
jurisdiction has determined that my home is in fact subject to section 70-238 I therefore am
trying to inspect the public record document that you used to reach that conclusion.
Here again is my request for your reference:
Any record in the custody of Gary Brandenburg that supports his statement, or any record
Brandenburg reviewed, referenced or relied upon in order to conclude that the style of O'Hare's home
"was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing."
I searched all the evidence from the hearing In my custody and on the Town's website. I can not find any record
in the proceedings that could reasonably be considered evidence supporting your conclusion that the style of
my home was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing.
Now you write to tell me you have no records described In my request. If you have no responsive records and
the Town has no responsive records then I respectfully request you explain to my how you reached the
conclusion that my home is in violation of section 70-238 and my roof covering choices therefore must be
limited to:
A. Installing a flat, white thru and thru, smooth uncoated tile; or
B. Installing similar tile to what was removed.
Your immediate attention to this matter and your Immediate response are of utmost importance and urgency to
me as I am about to install a roof material I do not want on my home in order to avoid the threat in your Order
of fines and liens upon the property that is the subject of this hearing, and all other
property owned by Respondent in Palm Beach County.
Please respond as soon as possible.
Chris O'Hare
From: Chris O'Hare [mailto:chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 5:12 PM
To: Bill Thrasher <bthrasher@gulf-stream.org>; Rita Taylor <RTaylor@gulf-stream.org>
Subject: Amendment to GS #2172 (brandenburg - style litigation - amended)
Dear Custodian of Records,
Attached please find an email from Town of Gulf Stream Magistrate Gary Brandenburg
regarding the public record request I made to both you and him.
Mr. Brandenburg writes that he does not have any public records described in my request. He
also writes, "Please do not contact me again regarding GuljStream public records." And he also asks that I
follow the requirements of the 2015 changes to FS 119. I assume he means the changes enacted
in 2016 according to the Committee Substitute for House Bill No. 273 (attached for your
reference).
Since I have already done just that and only copied this request to Mr. Brandenburg as a courtesy
to him and to expedite the record production process, I will none the less ask you again if you
have any records responsive to my request and if you don't would you please ask Mr.
Brandenburg, if you haven't asked him already, if he has responsive records in his custody.
As per Mr. Brandenburg's request I will now direct all my requests to inspect public records
regarding Mr. Brandenburg exclusively to you. In addition, since public records in Mr.
Brandenburg's custody will now be in your custody before I am provided the opportunity to
inspect those records I therefore amend my original request to inspect records which I originally
made to you on Apr 29, 2016 at 6:24 PM. The amended record request is as follows (deletions
are crossed out and new text is underlined):
Dear Custodian of Records,
I wish to inspect certain public records for the purpose of informing myself of the historic and current
workings of the Town of Gulf Stream and its associated entities, vendors, consultants, advisers,
contractors and agents. The records I wish to inspect may also be material to current, anticipated or
presently unforeseen legal action. The production of any and all responsive records is therefore urgent
and must be acted upon in compliance with Florida Statutes and established case law as soon as
possible. If you are not the custodian of the public records described herein please determine who that
person is and notify me immediately in order that I may make this request to the appropriate person
without delay. In all cases please reference Florida Statutes and appropriate case law when responding
to this record request.
Please read this entire request carefully and respond accordingly.
This email is a singular request for public records through the agency known as of the Town of Gulf
Stream. Please respond to this public record request in a singular manner and do not combine this public
record request with any other public record requests when responding to this request. Do NOT produce
any records other than records responsive to this request. Please identify by name the person or persons
responding to this request.
Before making this public record request, I first searched online and in the public records portion of your
agency's website hoping I could locate the public records I seek without having to trouble you for it.
Unfortunately I cannot find the records I wish to examine.
As background to this record request I call your attention to the attached Special
Magistrate Order CASE NO. 15-1 which was signed by Mr. Gary Brandenburg on
March 22, 2016. Specifically paragraph 2 on page 5 in which Brandenburg writes:
During the litigation, the style of house and roof covering allowed by Town
Code was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this
Code Enforcement hearing.
Since the enforcement of Town code section 70-238 is only applicable to O'Hare's
property if indeed the style of O'Hare's house has been determined, please
produce any record in the custody of Gary Brandenburg that supports his
statement, or any record Brandenburg reviewed, referenced or relied upon in
order to conclude that the style of O'Hare's home "was litigated extensively and is
not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing."
Another way of describing the record I wish to inspect, that may clarify but does
not replace my previous description, is: What record did Brandenburg have
knowledge of that caused him to confidently write, "the style of house... allowed
by Town Code was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this
Code Enforcement hearing."
Please DO NOT provide me with a copy of the entire hearing or all the evidence
submitted into the record of that hearing. I have already examined those records
and did not find within them any records responsive to my request. I DO NOT
Also I am NOT asking you to create a record to be responsive to this request. And
I am NOT asking you to interpret, comment on, or in any way manipulate any
record responsive to this request. I must want to inspect records responsive to
this request and nothing more.
I make this request pursuant to Article 1, Section 24 of the Florida Constitution and Chapter 119 of the
Florida Statutes.
If you contend that any of the records I am seeking, or any portion thereof, are exempt from inspection or
disclosure please cite the specific exemption as required by §119.07(1)(e) of the Florida Statutes and
state in writing and with particularity the basis for your conclusions as required by §119.07(1)(f) of the
Florida Statutes.
Please take note of §119.07(1)(c) Florida Statues and your affirmative obligation to (1)
promptly acknowledge receipt of this public records request and (2) make a good faith effort which
"includes making reasonable efforts to determine from other officers or employees within the agency
whether such a record exists and, if so, the location at which the record can be accessed." I am,
therefore, requesting that you notify every individual in possession of records that may be responsive to
this public records request to preserve all such records on an immediate basis.
If the public records being sought are maintained by your agency in an electronic format please produce
the records in the original electronic format in which they were created or received. See §119.01(2)(f),
Florida Statutes.
Please provide only those records for inspection that do not require extensive use of information
technologies or extensive staff time or both in excess of 15 minutes. Take note of §119.07(4)(a)3.(d)
Florida Statues and if you anticipate that any records exist, the production for inspection of which will
require extensive use of information technologies or extensive staff time or both in excess of 15 minutes,
then please provide those records that can be produced within the first 15 minutes and advise me of the
cost you anticipate to be incurred by your agency for the remaining records prior to incurring this cost.
Please do not incur any costs on my behalf without first obtaining my written authorization to proceed. If
you produce only a portion of all existing responsive records, please tell me that your response includes
only a portion of all existing records responsive to this request.
If you anticipate the need to incur any costs that I would be statutorily required to pay in order to inspect
these public records which would exceed $1.00 please notify me in advance of your incurring that cost
with a written estimate of the total cost. Please be sure to itemize any estimates so as to indicate the total
number of pages and/or records, as well as to distinguish the cost of labor and materials. Again, please
do not incur any costs on my behalf without first obtaining my written authorization to proceed.
The phrase Town of Gulf Stream used herein refers to the Town in its entirety including all employees,
appointees, officials, assignees, counsel and consultants including Town Manager, Town Clerk, Town
Police Chief, Town Commissioners, Town Mayor, Town Departments, Town Police Officers, Town
Employees, Town Engineer, the law firm (Jones Foster Johnston & Stubbs P.A.) that claims to be the
Town Attorney including all attorney, partner and employee members of that firm; the Town Counsel of
Sweetapple, Broeker & Varkus including all attorney, partner and employee members of that firm, the
Town Counsel of Richman Greer, P.A. including all attorney, partner and employee members of that firm
and any other entity associated with the Town and subject to public records law.
The term public records used herein has the same meaning and scope as the definition of Public records
adopted by the Florida Legislature as Statutes Chapter 119. A record that does not exist because of its
disposition requires the creation of a disposition record. In all instances where you determine a record
does not exist please determine if the record once existed and in its stead provide the disposition record
for my inspection.
I hereby reserve all rights granted to me under the Florida Constitution and Florida Statutes.
All responses to this public records request should be made in writing to the following email address:
chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com
5/10/2016 Gmail - follow up Fwd: GS #2172 (brandenburg - style litigation)
tr Gmail Chris O'Hare <chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com>
follow up Fwd: GS #2172 (brandenburg - style litigation)
Gary Brandenburg <gary@brandenburgpa.com>
To: Chris O'Hare <chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com>
Mr. O'Hare;
Tue, May 10, 2016 at 12:24 PM
Please follow the requirements of the 2015 changes to F.S. 119,
for this request, all previous requests and all future requests.
Thank you
Gary Brandenburg, Esq.
Brandenburg & Associates, P.A.
11891 U.S. Highway One, Suite 100
North Palm Beach, FL 33408
(561)799-1414
(561) 371-1824 (cell)
(561) 758-7496 (Sandy cell)
Gary@BrandenburgPA.com
From: Chris O'Hare [mailto:chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 8:50 PM
To: Gary Brandenburg <gary@brandenburgpa.com>; bthrasher@gulf-stream.org; RTaylor@gulf-
stream.org
Subject: Re: follow up Fwd: GS #2172 (brandenburg - style litigation)
Mr. Brandenburg,
Thank you for your continued response to my record request.
hftps://mail.googl e.com/mailftM?ui=2&i k=76585Oa6ad&vlm=pt&search=i nbox&m sg=154gb7c4eec22125&dsgt=l &si ml=154967c4aec22125 1/6
5/10/2616
Gmail - foil= up Fwd GS #2172 (brandenbvg - style litigation)
I remind you I seek to inspect a public record that must exist because you reference it in your Order in the
matter of Town of Gulf Stream CE 15-1. You very clearly wrote on page five of your Order, "During the litigation,
the style of house and roof covering allowed by Town Code was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be
revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing."
The style of my home is material to whether or not I was in violation of Town code Section 70-238. You
determined my home was in violation of section 70-238 and you claim the style of my home was litigated
extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing. I do not believe the style of
my home has ever been litigated but since you have determined that it has indeed been litigated and by
inference that a court of competent jurisdiction has determined that my home is in fact subject to section 70-238
1 therefore am trying to inspect the public record document that you used to mach that conclusion.
Here again is my request for your reference:
Any record In the custody of Gary Brandenburg that supports his statement, or any record Brandenburg
reviewed, referenced or relied upon In order to conclude that the style of O'Hare's home "was litigated
extensively and is not a subject to be revisited /n this Code Enforcement hearing."
I searched all the evidence from the hearing in my custody and on the Town's website. I can not find any record in
the proceedings that could reasonably be considered evidence supporting your conclusion that the style of my
home was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing.
Now you write to tell me you have no records described in my request. If you have no responsive records and the
Town has no responsive records then I respectfully request you explain to my how you reached the conclusion that
my home is in violation of section 70-238 and my roof covering choices therefore must be limited to:
A Installing a flat, white thru and thru, smooth uncoated tile; or
B. Installing similar tile to what was removed.
Your immediate attention to this matter and your immediate response are of utmost importance and urgency to me
as I am about to install a roof material I do P2 want on my home in order to avoid the threat in your Order of fines
and liens upon the property that is the subject of this hearing, and all other property owned by Respondent in
Palm Beach County.
Please respond as soon as possible.
Chris O'Hare
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Gary Brandenburg <gary@brandenburgpa.com> wrote:
ht",J/mail.go4e.cam/mail/WN7ui=2&lk=7G5650a6ad&view=ptUwcl--inbox&msg= 154967c4aec22125&dsg1=18siml=154967c4aec22125 216
-1111 '{IIIA
Mr. O'Hare
Gm ail - follow up Fwd: GS #2172 (brandenburg- style litigation)
I do not know how My previous response can be any more clear. I do not
have any Public records described in the request you have referenced in this
email.
All evidence from the hearing is in the position of the Town. The Town has a
tape of the meeting.
Gary Brandenburg, Esq.
Brandenburg & Associates, P.A.
11891 U.S. Highway One, Suite 100
North Palm Beach, FL 33408
(561)799-1414
(561) 371-1824 (cell)
(561) 758-7496 (Sandy cell)
Gary@BrandenburgPA.com
From: Chris O'Hare[mai Ito: chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.comi
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2016 2:32 PM
To: Gary Brandenburg <gary@brandenburgpa.com>
Cc: RTaylor@gulf-stream.org; bthrasher@gulf-stream.org
Subject: Re: follow up Fwd: GS #2172 (brandenburg - style litigation)
Mr. Brandenburg,
You write, "Please do not contact me again regarding Gulf Stream public records." To this I again remind you :
I DO NOT WANT TO INSPECT RECORDS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM.
I do not know how to be any more clear to you on this matter. I won't to inspect records in your custody
ONLY.
The new law does not prohibit me from contacting you at the same time that I contact the Town. I contacted
you as a courtesy to you so you would have a copy of my request to the Town. I also thought contacting you
at the same time as I contact the Town would help to expedite the production of the public records I want to
hftps:#mail.google.com/mail/u/0/7ui=2&ik=765&9Da6ad&view=pt&search=inbox&msg=154967c4aec22125&dsgt=1&sim1=154967c4aec22125 3/6
5/10/2016 Gmail - follow up Fwd: GS #2172 (brandenburg - style litigation)
inspect.
have already told you that I consider the production of this record urgent as it may be material to a legal
action.
You are required by law to assist the Town in the production of responsive records that are in your custody.
The Town writes that they are too busy working on other record requests. to produce these records now. Are
you too busy as well?
I asked for a simple record that must exist but I have been unable to find it anywhere. You must have it since
you refer to it in your Order in the matter of CE 15-1. Perhaps if you review of your notes from the hearing
(another record I have already requested to inspect) you will find the source for the record that is the subject
of this request.
Here is the request again for your reference:
Any record in the custody of Gary Brandenburg that supports his statement, or any record
Brandenburg reviewed, referenced or relied upon in order to conclude that the style of O'Hare's home
"was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing."
May I hear from you soon?
Sincerely,
Chris O'Hare
On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Gary Brandenburg <gary@brandenburgpa.com> wrote:
Mr. O'Hare
Under the new legislation you are required to request any public records held by contractors from the city.
Please do not contact me again regarding Gulf Stream public records.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 6, 2016, at 4:49 PM, Chris O'Hare <chdsoharegulfstream@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Custodian of Records,
htlps://mail.google.com/mail/LdO/?ui=2&ik=765650a6ad&view=pt&search=inbox&msg= 154967c4aec22125&dsg0=1&simI= 154967c4aec22125 4/6
5110/2016
Gmail - follow up Fwd: GS #2172 (brandentwrg- style litigation)
I am in receipt of your standard form letter wherein you seek more time to respond because
you are "currently working on a large number of
incoming public records requests."
I hope the Custodian of Records for Mr. Brandenburg is not likewise prevented from acting on
this record request promptly and your current work load won't prevent him from providing the
records to you so you can provide them to me. In order to save time and any unnecessary
effort on your part, why not ask Mr. Brandenburg to provide the public records directly to me for
my inspection?
I remind you that I specifically requested to inspect public records in the custody of Special
Magistrate Gary Brandenburg ONLY Please do NOT produce any records in the custody of the
Town of Gulf Stream Limit your response to ONLY records in Mr. Brandenburg's custody,
May I hear from you or from Mr. Brandenburg soon?
Have a great weekend,
Chris O'Hare
Dear Chris O'Hare [mail to: chdsoharegulfstream@gmail.com],
The Town of Gulf Stream has received your public records requests dated April 29, 2016. The
original public record request can be found at the following links http://www2.gulf-
stream.org/weblink/O/doc/90364/Pagel.aspx.
haps://mail.google.com/mail/tYO/?ui=2&ik=765B50a6ad&view=pt&search=inbox&msg=154967c4aec22125&dsgt=l&siml=154967c4aec22125 5/6
5/10/2016
Gmail - follow up Fwd: GS #2172 (brandenbwg- style litigation)
Please be advised that the Town of Gulf Stream is currently working on a large number of
incoming public records requests. The Town will use its very best efforts to respond to you in
a
reasonable amount of time with the appropriate response or an estimated cost to respond.
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Bill Thrasher <bthrasher@gulf-stream.org> wrote:
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole
use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Florida has a very
broad public records law. Written communications regarding Town of Gulf Stream business
are public records available to the public upon request. Your e-mail communications are
therefore subject to public disclosure. Under Florida law, e-mail addresses are public
records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records
request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by phone or
in writing.
httpsJ/mail.google.com/mail/WO/7ui=2&ik=765650a6ad&vlew=pt&searcWrbcxBmsg=154967c4aec22125&dsgt=l&siml=154gb7c4 a 22125 6/6
CHAPTER 2016-20
Committee Substitute for House Bill No. 273
An act relating to public records; amending s. 119.0701, F.S.; requiring a
public agency contract for services to include a statement providing the
contact information of the public agency's custodian of public records;
prescribing the form of the statement; revising required provisions in a
public agency contract for services regarding a contractor's compliance
with public records laws; requiring a public records request relating to
records for a public agency's contract for services to be made directly to the
public agency; requiring a contractor to provide requested records to the
public agency or allow inspection or copying of requested records under
specified circumstances; providing penalties; specifying circumstances
under which a court must award the reasonable costs of enforcement
against a contractor; specifying what constitutes sufficient notice;
providing that a contractor who takes certain actions is not liable for
the reasonable costs of enforcement; providing an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
Section 1. Section 119.0701, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
119.0701 Contracts; public records; request for contractor records: civil
action.—
(1) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section, the term:
(a) "Contractor" means an individual, partnership, corporation, or
business entity that enters into a contract for services with a public agency
and is acting on behalf of the public agency as provided under s. 119.011(2).
(b) "Public agency" means a state, county, district, authority, or
municipal officer, or department, division, board, bureau, commission, or
other separate unit of government created or established by law.
(2) CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS.—In addition to other contract
requirements provided by law, each public agency contract for services
entered into or amended on or after July 1, 2016, must include_
telephone number, e-mail address. and mailing address)....
1
CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
Ch. 2016-20 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 2016-20
(b) A provision that requires the contractor to comply with public records
laws, specifically to:
.-W Keep and maintain public records that er-dinarily and neeessar-i
weuld e required by the public agency in er-FleF to perform the service.
2.(h) Upon request from the public agency's custodian of public records,
provide the public agrenc with a copy of the requested records or allow the
assess to pubhe records to be inspected or copied within a reasonable time en
reeerds and at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided in this chapter or
as otherwise provided by law.
3.(e) Ensure that public records that are exempt or confidential and
exempt from public records disclosure requirements are not disclosed except
as authorized by law for the duration of the contract term and followine
completion of the contract if the contractor does not transfer the records to
the public agency.
4.(d3 Upon completion of the contract. Aleet all re ants r
transfer, at no cost, to the public agency all
public records in possession of the contractor or keep and maintain public
destroy any duplicate public records that are exempt or confidential and
exempt from public records disclosure requirements. If the contractor keeps
shall meet all applicable requirements for retaining public records. All
records stored electronically must be provided to the public agency, upon
request from the public agency's custodian of public records, in a format that
is compatible with the information technology systems of the public agency.
(3) REQUEST FOR RECORDS: NONCOMPLIANCE.
LW(3) If a contractor does not comply with the a public agency's r-eeer-Els
request for records, the public agency shall enforce the contract provisions in
accordance with the contract.
(c) A contractor who fails to provide the public records to the public
agency within a reasonable time may be subject to penalties under s. 119.10.
(_4) CIVIL ACTION. -
2
CODING: Words strieken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
Ch. 2016-20 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 2016-20
contractor.
may be in an electronic format.
enforcement.
Section 2. This act shall take effect upon becoming a law.
Approved by the Governor March 8, 2016.
Filed in Office Secretary of State March 8, 2016.
3
CODING: Words striekea are deletions; words underlined are additions.
From: Chris O'Hare [mailto:chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 5:12 PM
To: Bill Thrasher <bthrasher@gulf-stream.org>; Rita Taylor <RTaylor@gulf-stream.org>
Subject: Amendment to GS #2172 (brandenburg - style litigation - amended)
Dear Custodian of Records,
Attached please find an email from Town of Gulf Stream Magistrate Gary Brandenburg
regarding the public record request I made to both you and him.
Mr. Brandenburg writes that he does not have any public records described in my request. He
also writes, "Please do not contact me again regarding Guy'Stream public records. "And he also asks that I
follow the requirements of the 2015 changes to FS 119. I assume he means the changes enacted
in 2016 according to the Committee Substitute for House Bill No. 273 (attached for your
reference).
Since I have already done just that and only copied this request to Mr. Brandenburg as a courtesy
to him and to expedite the record production process, I will none the less ask you again if you
have any records responsive to my request and if you don't would you please ask Mr.
Brandenburg, if you haven't asked him already, if he has responsive records in his custody.
As per Mr. Brandenburg's request I will now direct all my requests to inspect public records
regarding Mr. Brandenburg exclusively to you. In addition, since public records in Mr.
Brandenburg's custody will now be in your custody before I am provided the opportunity to
inspect those records I therefore amend my original request to inspect records which I originally
made to you on Apr 29, 2016 at 6:24 PM. The amended record request is as follows (deletions
are crossed out and new text is underlined):
Dear Custodian of Records,
I wish to inspect certain public records for the purpose of informing myself of the historic and current
workings of the Town of Gulf Stream and its associated entities, vendors, consultants, advisers,
contractors and agents. The records I wish to inspect may also be material to current, anticipated or
presently unforeseen legal action. The production of any and all responsive records is therefore urgent
and must be acted upon in compliance with Florida Statutes and established case law as soon as
possible. If you are not the custodian of the public records described herein please determine who that
person is and notify me immediately in order that I may make this request to the appropriate person
without delay. In all cases please reference Florida Statutes and appropriate case law when responding
to this record request.
Please read this entire request carefully and respond accordingly.
This email is a singular request for public records through the agency known as of the Town of Gulf
Stream. Please respond to this public record request in a singular manner and do not combine this public
record request with any other public record requests when responding to this request. Do NOT produce
any records other than records responsive to this request. Please identify by name the person or persons
responding to this request.
Before making this public record request, I first searched online and in the public records portion of your
agency's website hoping I could locate the public records I seek without having to trouble you for it.
Unfortunately I cannot find the records I wish to examine.
As background to this record request I call your attention to the attached Special
Magistrate Order CASE NO. 15-1 which was signed by Mr. Gary Brandenburg on
March 22, 2016. Specifically paragraph 2 on page 5 in which Brandenburg writes:
During the litigation, the style of house and roof covering allowed by Town
Code was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this
Code Enforcement hearing.
Since the enforcement of Town code section 70-238 is only applicable to O'Hare's
property if indeed the style of O'Hare's house has been determined, please
produce any record in the custody of Gary Brandenburg that supports his
statement, or any record Brandenburg reviewed, referenced or relied upon in
order to conclude that the style of O'Hare's home "was litigated extensively and is
not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing."
Another way of describing the record I wish to inspect, that may clarify but does
not replace my previous description, is: What record did Brandenburg have
knowledge of that caused him to confidently write, "the style of house... allowed
by Town Code was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this
Code Enforcement hearing."
Please DO NOT provide me with a copy of the entire hearing or all the evidence
submitted into the record of that hearing. I have already examined those records
and did not find within them any records responsive to my request. I DO NOT
want to inspect records that are not responsive to this request. Please provide
only those documents that are responsive to this request.
Also I am NOT asking you to create a record to be responsive to this request. And
I am NOT asking you to interpret, comment on, or in any way manipulate any
record responsive to this request. I iust want to inspect records responsive to
this request and nothing more.
I make this request pursuant to Article 1, Section 24 of the Florida Constitution and Chapter 119 of the
Florida Statutes.
If you contend that any of the records I am seeking, or any portion thereof, are exempt from inspection or
disclosure please cite the specific exemption as required by §119.07(1)(e) of the Florida Statutes and
state in writing and with particularity the basis for your conclusions as required by §119.07(1)(f) of the
Florida Statutes.
Please take note of §119.07(1)(c) Florida Statues and your affirmative obligation to (1)
promptly acknowledge receipt of this public records request and (2) make a good faith effort which
"includes making reasonable efforts to determine from other officers or employees within the agency
whether such a record exists and, if so, the location at which the record can be accessed." I am,
therefore, requesting that you notify every individual in possession of records that may be responsive to
this public records request to preserve all such records on an immediate basis.
If the public records being sought are maintained by your agency in an electronic format please produce
the records in the original electronic format in which they were created or received. See §119.01(2)(f),
Florida Statutes.
Please provide only those records for inspection that do not require extensive use of information
technologies or extensive staff time or both in excess of 15 minutes. Take note of §119.07(4)(a)3.(d)
Florida Statues and if you anticipate that any records exist, the production for inspection of which will
require extensive use of information technologies or extensive staff time or both in excess of 15 minutes,
then please provide those records that can be produced within the first 15 minutes and advise me of the
cost you anticipate to be incurred by your agency for the remaining records prior to incurring this cost.
Please do not incur any costs on my behalf without first obtaining my written authorization to proceed. If
you produce only a portion of all existing responsive records, please tell me that your response includes
only a portion of all existing records responsive to this request.
If you anticipate the need to incur any costs that I would be statutorily required to pay in order to inspect
these public records which would exceed $1.00 please notify me in advance of your incurring that cost
with a written estimate of the total cost. Please be sure to itemize any estimates so as to indicate the total
number of pages and/or records, as well as to distinguish the cost of labor and materials. Again, please
do not incur any costs on my behalf without first obtaining my written authorization to proceed.
The phrase Town of Gulf Stream used herein refers to the Town in its entirety including all employees,
appointees, officials, assignees, counsel and consultants including Town Manager, Town Clerk, Town
Police Chief, Town Commissioners, Town Mayor, Town Departments, Town Police Officers, Town
Employees, Town Engineer, the law firm (Jones Foster Johnston & Stubbs P.A.) that claims to be the
Town Attorney including all attorney, partner and employee members of that firm; the Town Counsel of
Sweetapple, Broeker & Varkus including all attorney, partner and employee members of that firm, the
Town Counsel of Richman Greer, P.A. including all attorney, partner and employee members of that firm
and any other entity associated with the Town and subject to public records law.
The term public records used herein has the same meaning and scope as the definition of Public records
adopted by the Florida Legislature as Statutes Chapter 119. A record that does not exist because of its
disposition requires the creation of a disposition record. In all instances where you determine a record
does not exist please determine if the record once existed and in its stead provide the disposition record
for my inspection.
I hereby reserve all rights granted to me under the Florida Constitution and Florida Statutes.
All responses to this public records request should be made in writing to the following email address:
chrisoharegulfstream@gmall.com
TOWN OF GULF STREAM
PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
Delivered via e-mail
June 10, 2016
Chris O'Hare [mail to: chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com]
Re: GS # 2172 (brandenburg - style litigation), #2171 (brandenburg - previous litigation)
As background to this record request I call your attention to the attached Special Magistrate Order
CASE NO. 15-1 which was signed by Mr. Gary Brandenburg on March 22, 2016. Specifically
paragraph 2 on page 5 in which Brandenburg writes: During the litigation, the style of house and
roof covering allowed by Town Code was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited
in this Code Enforcement hearing. Since the enforcement of Town code section 70-238 is only
applicable to O Hare's property if indeed the style of O'Hare's house has been determined, please
produce any record in the custody of Gary Brandenburg that supports his statement, or any record
Brandenburg reviewed, referenced or relied upon in order to conclude that the style of
O'Hare's home "was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code
Enforcement hearing. " Another way of describing the record 1 wish to inspect, that may clarify
but does not replace my previous description, is: not record did Brandenburg have knowledge
of that caused him to confidently write, "the style of house... allowed by Town Code was litigated
extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing. " (amended
5110116 - Please DO NOT provide me with a copy of the entire hearing or all the evidence
submitted into the record of that hearing. I have already examined those records and did not find
within them any records responsive to my request. I DO NOT want to inspect records that are not
responsive to this request. Please provide only those documents that are responsive to this request.
Also lam NOT asking you to create a record to be responsive to this request. And I am NOT asking
you to interpret, comment on, or in any way manipulate any record responsive to this request. I
just want to inspect records responsive to this request and nothing more.)
As background to this record request I call your attention to the attached Special Magistrate Order
CASE NO. 15-1 which was signed by Mr. Gary Brandenburg on March 22, 2016. Specifically
paragraph 3 on page 5 in which Brandenburg writes: Although it has been thoroughly argued and
decided in previous litigation what type of tile must be used on Respondent's house; Please
produce any record in the custody of Gary Brandenburg that supports this statement, or any record
Brandenburg reviewed, referenced or relied upon in order to conclude, "it has been thoroughly
argued and decided in previous litigation what type of the must be used on respondent's house."
Another way of describing the record I wish to inspect, that may clarify but does not replace my
previous description, is: What record did Brandenburg have knowledge of that caused him to
confidently write, "Although it has been thoroughly argued and decided in previous litigation what
type of tile must be used on Respondent's house; "
Dear Chris O'Hare [mail to: chrisohareeulfstream(@gmail.coml,
The Town of Gulf Stream has received your original record requests dated April 29, 2016. Your
original public records request can be found at the following htto://www2.eulf-
stream.ore/weblink/0/doc/90364/Paael.asox and httn://www2.eulf-
stream.ore/weblink/0/doc/90529/Paael.asox. Please refer to the referenced number above with
any future correspondence.
The records regarding Case No. 15-1 can be found by going to www.gulf-stream.ore, click on
"Find a Town Record", click on "Town Clerk", click on "Special Magistrate", click on "Cases",
click on "2520 Avenue Au Soleil", and click on "10/30/15 Case # CE 15-1 ". Aside of those
records, there are no finther records responsive to your requests.
We consider this matter closed.
Sincerely,Town Clerk, Custodian of the Records
TOWN OF GULF STREAM
PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
Delivered via e-mail
June 10, 2016
Chris O'Hare [mail to: chrisoharegulfstream@gmail.com]
Re: GS # 2172 (brandenburg - style litigation), #2171 (brandenburg - previous litigation)
As background to this record request I call your attention to the attached Special Magistrate Order
CASE NO. 15-1 which was signed by Mr. Gary Brandenburg on March 22, 2016. Specifically
paragraph 2 on page 5 in which Brandenburg writes: During the litigation, the style of house and
roof covering allowed by Town Code was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited
in this Code Enforcement hearing. Since the enforcement of Town code section 70-238 is only
applicable to O Hare's property if indeed the style of O'Hare's house has been determined, please
produce any record in the custody of Gary Brandenburg that supports his statement, or any record
Brandenburg reviewed, referenced or relied upon in order to conclude that the style of
O'Hare's home "was litigated extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code
Enforcement hearing. " Another way of describing the record 1 wish to inspect, that may clarify
but does not replace my previous description, is: not record did Brandenburg have knowledge
of that caused him to confidently write, "the style of house... allowed by Town Code was litigated
extensively and is not a subject to be revisited in this Code Enforcement hearing. " (amended
5110116 - Please DO NOT provide me with a copy of the entire hearing or all the evidence
submitted into the record of that hearing. I have already examined those records and did not find
within them any records responsive to my request. I DO NOT want to inspect records that are not
responsive to this request. Please provide only those documents that are responsive to this request.
Also lam NOT asking you to create a record to be responsive to this request. And I am NOT asking
you to interpret, comment on, or in any way manipulate any record responsive to this request. I
just want to inspect records responsive to this request and nothing more.)
As background to this record request I call your attention to the attached Special Magistrate Order
CASE NO. 15-1 which was signed by Mr. Gary Brandenburg on March 22, 2016. Specifically
paragraph 3 on page 5 in which Brandenburg writes: Although it has been thoroughly argued and
decided in previous litigation what type of tile must be used on Respondent's house; Please
produce any record in the custody of Gary Brandenburg that supports this statement, or any record
Brandenburg reviewed, referenced or relied upon in order to conclude, "it has been thoroughly
argued and decided in previous litigation what type of the must be used on respondent's house."
Another way of describing the record I wish to inspect, that may clarify but does not replace my
previous description, is: What record did Brandenburg have knowledge of that caused him to
confidently write, "Although it has been thoroughly argued and decided in previous litigation what
type of tile must be used on Respondent's house; "
Dear Chris O'Hare [mail to: chrisohareeulfstream(@gmail.coml,
The Town of Gulf Stream has received your original record requests dated April 29, 2016. Your
original public records request can be found at the following htto://www2.eulf-
stream.ore/weblink/0/doc/90364/Paael.asox and httn://www2.eulf-
stream.ore/weblink/0/doc/90529/Paael.asox. Please refer to the referenced number above with
any future correspondence.
The records regarding Case No. 15-1 can be found by going to www.gulf-stream.ore, click on
"Find a Town Record", click on "Town Clerk", click on "Special Magistrate", click on "Cases",
click on "2520 Avenue Au Soleil", and click on "10/30/15 Case # CE 15-1 ". Aside of those
records, there are no finther records responsive to your requests.
We consider this matter closed.
Sincerely,Town Clerk, Custodian of the Records